Bike City Index, Utrecht three times more deadly than Bristol for cyclists

[The utility cyclist]

So, despite this article giving Utrecht the big thumbs up, despite the Dutch town having bags of segregated, the elephant in the room is that per 100,000 cyclists it's not actually a particularly safe place to cycle with respect to cycling deaths. 1.94 deaths per 100,000, Bristol has 0.58.
Discuss
https://coya.com/bike/index-2019

[mjr]

Does Bristol even have 100,000 cyclists?

NL counts cyclists deaths very differently to the UK, including things which are excluded here.

The most famous recent example is what happens if your ebike gets away from you when mounting it, leaving you to fall hard tangled with a relatively heavy bike and die: that's a cyclist death in NL but not in the UK, even leaving aside the oft-claimed police reluctance to record cyclists crashing away from carriageways.

Another notorious example is if you get run over by a motorist and linger on for five weeks before they switch the life support off, that's only a serious injury in the UK, not a death.

So are you comparing like with like?

[reohn2]

How much time and Km's does an average Utrecht cyclist spend on the bike compared to the average Bristol cyclist?

[Ellieb]

The fatality rate is per cyclist. So if, for example, the average distance travelled in Utrecht is 1000km per year, but in Bristol it’s 100km it wouldn’t be entirely surprising to find that Utrecht has a higher fatality per cyclist. Until we know how it relates to amount of cycle useage the figure is pretty meaningless. I also note they from the link you cited Utrecht is rated the best place in the planet to ride a bike. Go figure.
EDIT: Can’t find figures for individual cities but the Dutch do in fact cycle an average if 1000km a year whilst in the UK it’s 60km

[Tigerbiten]

Bristol probably has a much smaller proportion of the most venerable cyclist, the very young and old.
This also skewes the results towards Bristol being safer because road warriors tend not to get into accidents.
Or if they do, they have the power and knowledge to get out of them with minor results.

[PH]

The fatality rate is per cyclist. S

No - if you read the report it clearly states "Total number of cyclists estimated from bicycle usage rates as well as bicycle ownership rates."
Still estimated and as mjr says the data might not be up to the task, it's still more than simply counting all cyclists as equal.

[PH]

So are you comparing like with like?

I don't think it is, compared to Utrecht Bristol has four times the fatalities but only a quarter of the other injuries. Doesn't add up.

[The utility cyclist]

Does Bristol even have 100,000 cyclists?

NL counts cyclists deaths very differently to the UK, including things which are excluded here.

The most famous recent example is what happens if your ebike gets away from you when mounting it, leaving you to fall hard tangled with a relatively heavy bike and die: that's a cyclist death in NL but not in the UK, even leaving aside the oft-claimed police reluctance to record cyclists crashing away from carriageways.

Another notorious example is if you get run over by a motorist and linger on for five weeks before they switch the life support off, that's only a serious injury in the UK, not a death.

So are you comparing like with like?

More the point, does Utrecht?
If a UK cyclist dies on the road or cycle path then that is classed as a vehicle death, the vehicle being a cycle, I think you are mistaken. And your 5 weeks, please show me the relevant laws for both countries and how many that applies to for either Utrecht or Bristol, you're simply speculating.
I don't know how the data was compiled but they are blowing a bugle for something that actually shows one of the flagships cities as being one of there worst despite all the advantages of segregation and supposedly safety in numbers.
Utrechts figures should be an order lower than Bristol's even taking into account your speculative numbers of deaths attributed differently.

[The utility cyclist]

The fatality rate is per cyclist. So if, for example, the average distance travelled in Utrecht is 1000km per year, but in Bristol it’s 100km it wouldn’t be entirely surprising to find that Utrecht has a higher fatality per cyclist. Until we know how it relates to amount of cycle useage the figure is pretty meaningless. I also note they from the link you cited Utrecht is rated the best place in the planet to ride a bike. Go figure.
EDIT: Can’t find figures for individual cities but the Dutch do in fact cycle an average if 1000km a year whilst in the UK it’s 60km

no they don't, it's significantly less than that and the UKs is more than your figure.
Also we are specifically talking about people who cycle, not people who don't cycle so your miles per population head is meaningless.

[Bmblbzzz]

Does Bristol even have 100,000 cyclists?

Not yet but we're working on it.

[PH]

I don't know how the data was compiled but they are blowing a bugle for something that actually shows one of the flagships cities as being one of there worst despite all the advantages of segregation and supposedly safety in numbers.

Do you have an explanation for this?
Accidents / 100,000 Cyclists
Bristol 1054.36
Utrecht 279.88

So the ratio of fatal to none fatal accidents in Utrecht is 144 and in Bristol it's 1,817
I can't think of a plausible explanation other than there being something seriously wrong with the data.

[Tigerbiten]

Looks like it's a bit "all or nothing".

It could be because most of the cyclist are segregated, you'll probably won't be getting a lot of the "everyday" type of low speed/energy crashes which we all complain about but you tend walk away from with only bruising.
This leaves only the higher energy crashes at junctions which tend to have a lot worse outcome.

[cotswolds]

I've read elsewhere that cycle deaths are going up in the Netherlands because of ebikes. They're very popular and bringing people into cycling, including the elderly.

Older people don't have more accidents or worse accidents, but an accident is much more likely to be fatal because they don't bounce as well. Something a younger person would walk away from puts an older person in hospital, where they sometimes die.

I think this could easily explain the figures.

[PH]

It could be because most of the cyclist are segregated, you'll probably won't be getting a lot of the "everyday" type of low speed/energy crashes which we all complain about but you tend walk away from with only bruising.
This leaves only the higher energy crashes at junctions which tend to have a lot worse outcome.

I did consider that, but who reports those anywhere?

[Wanlock Dod]

Given that Melbourne is rated as the best city both in terms of cyclist deaths and injuries personally I am a bit skeptical about this data. Could it be that deaths/injuries of cyclists per 100,000 of the population has actually been reported?