How dangerous is cycling?

[allen-uk]

Are there any accurate statistics on cycling accidents per road mile cycled?

I know that a 'slight' accident car vs. bike will often be far more serious than a car vs. car accident, but sometimes the media seem to jump on cycling, particularly in London, as being akin to base jumping, and I wondered whether figures exist either way.

A

 

[flecc]

I've researched this before and found very little, and certainly nothing reliable.

TfL reckon there are now some 570,000 daily cycle journeys in London. That will be almost all on weekdays of course, much of it commuting. So all we can do is estimate an average journey length and use that for total mileage against cyclist numbers, the latter being a halving of the journey figure of course since virtually all are return journeys. My guess is that the average journey is about 4 or 5 miles, made up of a lot of shorter journeys against a smaller number of long commutes.

That gives a total daily return weekday mileage of 4.6 to 5.8 million miles.

The numbers killed and notifiably injured in accidents is running at about 700 annually at present, of whom some 14 are killed.

On the basis that most work 47 weeks a year after allowing for all holidays, the total annual cycling mileage comes out as about 1200 million.

So the risk of injury annually is about 1 in 470 on a per cyclist basis and 1 in 42,000 on a mileage basis.

The annual average risk of death is about 1 in 20,400 cyclists.

The above is of course based on the guesstimate of the average journey being around 4.5 miles, adjust if you think that figure too high or low.

Either way, cycling in London is quite a safe pursuit, especially considering the scale of traffic in such a small area.
.

 

[allen-uk]

And how does that figure (which certainly seems well calculated) compare with cars or pedestrians (which I assume are officially available)?

A

 

[Emo Rider]

My only concern, when commuting by bike, is to arrive safely. However, in my almost daily 15 miles something happens that has the potential to be an incident. Either by the actions of a driver or brain dead pedestrian, too involved in their phone to look where they are going, I am constantly on guard. Flec posted some great stats that show that it is more the vigilence of bikers that keep the carnage down.

 

[flecc]

And how does that figure (which certainly seems well calculated) compare with cars or pedestrians (which I assume are officially available)?

A

There's no stats for car mileages related to London, but there are total numbers for the various groups affected by accidents. So we can compare those and adjust the rates both for gross numbers, and risk rates according to our opinions. From the latest annual figures available (2012):

Killed: Pedestrians 69, cyclists 14, car occupants 19.

Serious injury: Pedestrians 1054, cyclists 657, car occupants 429.

Slight injury: Pedestrians 4143, cyclists 3942, car occupants 11217.

So relative to numbers and mileage, car occupancy has a very low risk of death, a low risk of serious injury but a perhaps surprisingly high risk of slight injury. That is of course what we should expect, given lower city speeds and the protection that a modern car gives.

As for pedestrians, it's difficult to have any comparison since we all walk and London has the highest incidence of walking in Britain. However, at an average of nearly 250 miles each annually, that's not many miles, but at least more of us walk journeys than anywhere else.
.

 

[neptune]

Hoping not to sound sarcastic, there is of course more to Britain than London. In rural areas, cars are fewer, but speeds are higher. On the back lanes of Lincolnshire, 99% of drivers exercise remarkable restraint, and are on the lookout for the occasional bicycle.

 

[allen-uk]

Good news from Lincolnshire then, neptune. In London drivers aren't so thoughtful.

A

 

[flecc]

Hoping not to sound sarcastic, there is of course more to Britain than London.

Allen made a specific mention of London, and obviously traffic densities and interactions are highest in this city. Therefore I answered on that basis, to illustrate probably the worst we as cyclists could expect in Britain. I think that's better than playing the authorities favourite game of playing down dangers by quoting favourable statistics.
.

 

[crE]

Due to this thread I have purchased a high vis vest and some high vis straps for my backpack and bike

 

[crE]

Nearly got hit the other day by a driver who pulled out without looking.

 

[allen-uk]

Fair enough all round, but it would still be good to have some official figures on deaths and injuries collated by different means of transport and frequency.

Otherwise cycling 'statistics' are always going to be anecdotal, apart from the occasional attempt (like flecc's above) to impose some order on them.

Indeed, from the various figures quoted, it seems that it is more dangerous to walk (particularly in London) than ride.

A

 

[JohnCade]

Fair enough all round, but it would still be good to have some official figures on deaths and injuries collated by different means of transport and frequency.

Otherwise cycling 'statistics' are always going to be anecdotal, apart from the occasional attempt (like flecc's above) to impose some order on them.

Indeed, from the various figures quoted, it seems that it is more dangerous to walk (particularly in London) than ride.
A

Context is all. How many pedestrians walking about compared to cyclists?

 

[allen-uk]

Context is all. How many pedestrians walking about compared to cyclists?

That's the point, John.

If there's ten times the pedestrians, then the figures flecc quoted make cycling the more dangerous! Hence the plea for 'real' official figures.

A

 

[neptune]

Flecc, I take your point about London and statistics. Someone mentioned High Viz. Personally i never ride without it. IMO, especially on rural roads, it is more important than a helmet. [I don`t wear a helmet often.]

 

[eHomer]

All my cycling now is in rural Norfolk, not only nice and flat, but also mostly wide open views with few blind corners.

The difference to my previous Northampton is quite marked, where cycling could be pretty dangerous with much more twisty lanes and blind corners. Many car drivers tear up twisty hill climbs, quite oblivious to the possibility of a plodding cyclist doing 5 mph just round the next bend.

I cycled in London as a lad, paper rounds and a trade delivery bike for Victoria Wine, but didn't feel at risk then, though it was 50 tears ago.

Cycle helmets and high vis hadn't even been invented then, but I wouldn't cycle a yard without wearing them now.

Another concern of city riding for me now would be the hyper ventilating in heavy traffic, though I did do it then, long before cats and lead-free petrol had been introduced too.

 

[flecc]

If there's ten times the pedestrians, then the figures flecc quoted make cycling the more dangerous! Hence the plea for 'real' official figures.

A

As mentioned, we almost all walk at least some of the time, so on that basis there are over 8 million London residents, plus out-of-towners and a huge number of visitors. Therefore the numbers of accidents involving pedestrians doesn't really reflect a high rate.

Also there is a big distortion factor present. Tourists and recent immigrants are involved in a disproportionately high number of pedestrian accidents, no doubt many of them due to instinctively looking the wrong way when starting to cross, since most countries drive on the wrong side of the road.

Factor those out and the pedestrian accident rate for Londoners is low, making cycling almost certainly the second most dangerous way to use our roads.

Second most? Motorcycles are by far the most dangerous way, judging by the death and very serious injury rates. Death rate alone is one in about 2500 annually, over eight times London's cycling death rate.
.

 

[john h]

And yet it could be one of the safest forms of transport, as it was in days gone by, before cars where on the roads if only they would build cycle lanes away from cars as others have done.

 

[Emo Rider]

One of the biggest problems I see both in my personal cycling and many, many videos on youtube is drivers using their vehicles as weapons. Even with video proof, police seem to do very little to properly charge, fine or imprison dangerous drivers that cause serious injury and death.

There was an incident that I reported that involved a vehicle that broke three traffic laws. I, nor the oncoming vehicle, was hit but it was clearly a case of dangerous driving. All recorded. The outcome? Nothing. I could have easily been seriously hurt or killed and at the end of the day my efforts to report it meant nothing.

There needs to be bigger teeth in the laws to protect cyclist. If I was to walk down a high street with a cricket bat swinging it at people and hitting them, I would be arrested and charged. So why, when a driver uses their vehicle to asault and injure, why are they not charged?

Sorry mate, I didn't see you seems to be all that is needed for get out of jail free card.

 

[crE]

I had 3 cars today on my commute from work come dangerously close to me. Overtaking and nearly skimming the cars going the other way. To the point I felt the pull of the car. Doesn't take many of them to cause an accident.

I flail my arm in the air at least three times a week! Probably not the safest thing to do but it's the only way I can convey my anger

 

[Emo Rider]

I had 3 cars today on my commute from work come dangerously close to me. Overtaking and nearly skimming the cars going the other way. To the point I felt the pull of the car. Doesn't take many of them to cause an accident.

I flail my arm in the air at least three times a week! Probably not the safest thing to do but it's the only way I can convey my anger

All these vehicles are breaking highway code163. I had a car hauling a trailer pass me yesterday. The car was way too close and then the box of the trailer brushed my sleeve. There was no oncoming traffic and plenty of room to pass safely. I should have been able to send that video to the police and the driver immediately charged. But that mechanisim does not exist. If it did, you'd soon see drivers giving you room.