- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Broken bike (CC licensed image by garryknight, www.flickr.com)Serious injuries among Britain's cyclists rising three times faster than distance ridden
The number of cyclists seriously injured on Great Britain’s roads is rising faster than the total distance people are cycling each year, the Department for Transport (DfT) has admitted – and our own analysis suggests it is growing three times as quickly.
According to the Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain Annual Report 2014, published today by the DfT, 3,401 cyclists were seriously injured in road traffic collisions last year, an 8.2 per cent increase on 2013’s figures.
But the total distance travelled by cyclists rose by less than half that during the 12-month period, up 3.8 per cent in 2014 to stand at 3.2 billion vehicle miles – and the longer-term picture is even more concerning.
Analysis by road.cc of DfT statistics reveal that the annual distance ridden in 2014 was 14.4 per cent higher than the average during 2005-09.
And with the DfT saying that serious injuries reported to the police last year were 42 per cent higher than the 2005-09 average, that means they are rising three times faster than the distance cyclists cover each year.
“With the exception of 2012 to 2013, the number of seriously injured pedal cyclists has increased every year since the low of 2,174 in 2004,” the report says.
“This long term rise indicates that there is an ever increasing problem with pedal cyclist casualties.”
The picture is different when it comes to deaths, however. The number of cyclists killed last year was 113, which was 13 per cent down on that 2005-09 average, says the DfT, which was 13 per cent down on that 2005-09 average.
Since 2008, the number of fatalities each year has stood between 104 and 118, and while last year’s figure was four higher than in 2013, the DfT maintains that “This change is not part of a meaningful trend and is not statistically significant.”
In terms of total reported casualties among bike riders – including slight injuries – there was a 9.5 per cent increase to 21,287 last year, says the DfT, which it says is 31 per cent higher than the low recorded in 2007.
“Pedal cyclists are the only road user group with casualty numbers of most severities above the 2005-09 average,” says the DfT, which adds, “Some of the explanation behind the rising number of pedal cyclist casualties is in the volume of cycle traffic.
“On-road pedal cycle traffic rose by 3.8 per cent to 3.25 billion vehicle miles in 2014. This means that cycle traffic has risen by 27 per cent since 2007, not far short of the 31 per cent rise in casualties over that period.
“It is likely that the increase in cycling has resulted in more accidents as cyclist become more exposed to motor vehicle traffic,” it added.
Looking at individual years in isolation does not reflect long-term trends however, and during the past two decades only 2004 and 2007 saw a drop in distance travelled compared to the previous year.
In fact, 2007 had the lowest recorded mileage during that 2005-09 period, at 2.6 billion vehicle miles – which is why we calculated the average for those same years, which came out at 2.8 billion.
Indeed, apart from 2004, over the past two decades only 2007 has seen a drop in distance travelled.
Among all road users, there were 1,775 fatalities last year – 446 of those pedestrians – with the total up 4 per cent on 2013, while serious injuries rose 5 per cent to stand at 22,807.
Meanwhile, Sustrans says that road traffic casualties are “an avoidable tragedy” and has urged the government to do more to protect vulnerable road users.
Claire Francis, campaigns manager at the sustainable transport charity, said: "Seeing these figures climb is distressing. Every death and injury on the roads is an avoidable tragedy and Government has a duty to protect the most vulnerable.
“Government has pledged to reduce the number of cyclists and other road users killed and seriously injured every year, which they are currently failing to do.
“They have also pledged to double cycling levels by 2025 and make it 'the natural choice for short journeys' but many people feel unsafe riding without the protection afforded by high-quality infrastructure," she continued.
"This is being provided in some places but sadly lacking in others.
"Government must invest consistent, long-term funding to make cycling and walking a realistic option for all.”
She added: “The upcoming Spending Review is the perfect opportunity to pledge support for an ambitious commitment to the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy."
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Simon E 1 sec ago
Being a titchy lightweight I find the minimum pressures shown on bike tyres are considerably higher than I would use....
- Simon E 12 min 55 sec ago
Bruyneel saying publicly that Boonen "should shut up" is all you need to know about both Bruyneel and the doping regime at his team. Dirty in both...
- Barraob1 25 min 19 sec ago
I like it because it's a bit different, but it's way out of my price range. Wonder if it will take off, or will we be talking about in 15 years...
- kingleo 33 min 58 sec ago
Cyclists used the roads before cars - it was cyclists who petitioned the government to put a hard surface on our roads.
- wtjs 30 min 17 sec ago
I had a brief moment of déjà vu about established reds...
- hawkinspeter 4 hours 1 min ago
I saw something about the Smart Lever a month or so ago, and was intrigued enough to put it on my Xmas list, so maybe I'll get to have a play with...
- hawkinspeter 5 hours 33 min ago
Who the fuck's that?
- PRSboy 6 hours 19 min ago
Rather better than my effort on Coll de Rates at 28:05, but in my defence it was 30c, I'd had a big lunch and a beer and climbed it on an old MTB I...
- Secret_squirrel 6 hours 32 min ago
Surely these are only as good as your knowledge of their placement? They seem a bit pointless without a decent amount of Sports Massage / Physio...
- lesterama 6 hours 46 min ago
Nice. I'd ride that Madone now.
Add new comment
29 comments
Deaths are down because emergency procedures have improved as a result of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The police refuse to use cycle camera evidence to take action against drivers who endanger cyclists so the problem will only get worse until separated safe and convenient cycle infrastructure is routinely provided. This is very unlikely in such an uncivilised motor supremacist culture.
Govt should be ashamed of this record, but overall "road safety" will be still going down due to ever more protecting people inside vehicles at tne expense of those outside.
other reasons:
Mobiles, satnavs, facebook, texts - A lot of this didn't exist in any usable form just 5 years ago, certainly 10.
A scarily increasing number of cars now have touchscreen menu driven screens - What numbnuts puts a touchscreen in a car???
Almost total lack of enforcement and presence by police, leading to a Mad Max style road environment where biggest bully wins
Govt should be ashamed of this record, but overall "road safety" will be still going down due to ever more protecting people inside vehicles at tne expense of those outside.
other reasons:
Mobiles, satnavs, facebook, texts - A lot of this didn't exist in any usable form just 5 years ago, certainly 10.
A scarily increasing number of cars now have touchscreen menu driven screens - What numbnuts puts a touchscreen in a car???
Almost total lack of enforcement and presence by police, leading to a Mad Max style road environment where biggest bully wins
My opinion, for all that it is worth, is we are reaching the peak of a perfect storm. Modern motor vehicles are required to withstand a 35 MPH impact with a concrete wall and every occupant able to reach for the nearest door and walk away from the wreck, so drivers have lost the fear of injury in a wreck. Combine that with reductions in police funding that has mostly been dealt with by reduction of traffic policing and drivers are not worried about legal repercussions from bad driving, and the endless drumbeat of mostly fabricated bad press about cyclists making cyclists "other than human" in many eyes, and cyclists are the perfect target for taking out the odd bit of anger at the world. The only refuge has been the massive increase in helmet and handlebar cams and still that hasn't been enough to stop drivers from hitting cyclists.
One factor no one here has mentioned so far is distracted driving. This is known to be an increasingly serious problem. Too many people think it's ok to be on the phone while driving, or even text or surf the Internet while driving. It isn't.
If you have a hand free kit, throw it away. Those things don't work and are now being banned in France as the French are up to speed with the latest research, which we clearly aren't in the UK. The human brain hasn't evolved to such a degree that it can carry out two complex functions, driving and having a conversation, at the same time.
No, having a conversation with someone in the car is not the same as being on the phone, research process that too.
I work in data analysis for an insurance company and we're seeing a 5% increase in vehicle collisions in the last 5 years together with an increase in miles traveled by vehicles. We're putting this down in part to fuel duty being frozen.
So whilst there are more cyclist on the roads to get injured there are also more motorist traveling more miles to do the injuring.
Fuel is around 30% cheaper in France. Do they travel 30% further and have 30% more collisions?
No shit Sherlock. The roads are a very dangerous place.
Two reasons spring to mind: one, growth in cycling brings a large number of new, inexperienced cyclists on to the roads. Two, cycling is likely to be growing fastest in crowded cities, where the chances of being hit and injured are also highest. It's also possible that the total distance cycled is inaccurate.
I've got a third, the whole us v them argument. Never in my life have I had car (in this instance a scaffolding wagon) drivers going out of their way to try and hit me when I've been out cycling. There is a very aggressive attitude in this country and that might, just might, manifest itself in an increase in cycling injuries.
I'd add the reduction in active policing of behaviour on the roads and the actual state of repair of the roads.
I doubt if state of repair is much of a factor. Sure, there are bound to be incidents when someone drives into a cyclist because they weren't expecting the cyclist to swerve round a pothole or similar, but I'd expect they're rather rare. If they are a noticeable factor, we should see regional variations eg fewer injuries in Wales, as they seem to have amazingly well kept lanes.
But lack of policing, yes, that's definitely got to be a factor. Couple that with the increased motor vehicle mileage (and perhaps increased speed?) from cheaper fuel, as mentioned a few posts up, and it's a double-whammy.
First point, no. Second point, source?
We need distance passing law in the UK like the French have, but we won't get it until we get a government that doesn't loathe cyclists.
join this article to the one on sentencing.
If drivers were shit scared of what might happen maybe they wouldn't be so complacent?
No one sets out to kill, but too many simply don't think, and the chance of being pulled by the police?
If we change the situation to one where most drivers believe that they will get pulled over for speeding/tailgating/etc you will see drivers paying more attention.
Wouldn't private healthcare be more interested in having very healthy customers?
Yeh, just like turkeys are interested in Christmas.
He has a point - if you pay health insurance then the private company only pays out when you are sick. It is better for them to keep you healthy - this is why my private dental care is keen that I keep up to date with my visits to the hygienist.
Where there is a problem is if private companies are picking up overflow work from the NHS which isn't being paid for from insurance premiums but by the tax payer.
but for Private healthcare to get traction in the UK the NHS has to fail first,. The NHS doesn't make donations to the political parties or secure contracts for golfing buddies.
have you been reading the news? The NHS is failing....
...and to a very large extent, because it is desperately trying to fix all the people who are overweight and suffer a long litany of problems because they eat to much, suffer from type 2 diabetes and don't get sufficient exercise.
You mean the 70% pro Tory media that are pushing this propaganda line hard? It is hard to function when funds are being squeezed from you.
Oh I know, best way to pursue privatisation, make it appear to fail, aided and abetted by the right wing media, then suddenly huge taxpayer cash injection after privatisation and everything is better. Obviously privatisation fixed the problem not the post privatisation subsidies,
Most of the electorate are, I am afraid to say, gullible.
Yeah I bet insurance companies hate it when young males pay them thousands of pounds in premiums. flipside, they'll love it when autonomous cars cause the turn-over of their industry to shrink 90% (sarc)
They probably will, given the motor insurance industry in the UK pays out more in claims than the premiums it brings in. But you knew that.
http://www.theactuary.com/news/2014/11/motor-insurance-to-make-a-loss-as...
And within a couple of lines the articles states that the previous year they made a profit. Article also states the industry can't sustain continuing loses and will have to increase premiums.
Would you prefer to profit on £1 billion turnover or £10 billion turnover?
Autonomous vehicles will wipe out 90% of the vehicle insurance industry.
Another thing to consider is that manufacturers may want to insure their own cars in-house and deal with any legal claims directly in order to get precedents set in their favour.
Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK) Dreads the Release of Autonomous Cars - Library for Smart Investors
In a word, no.
"Risk is good" is a general principle in insurance, and healthcare is just another type of insurance. Without risk the premise for insurance falls away and the as does motive to buy it (that's why insurance companies don't offer 3rd party cycling insurance as a specific product - the risk is too low)
There is good motive for healthcare companies to encourage policies that produce unhealthy populations. Don't forget, their business model is to make profit from health care, not to manage health. Increased premium is the private sector's response to increased risk.
The Tories have blood on their hands. But they don't care. They don't want you on a bike. They don't care about climate change. They don't care about obesity. They want fat people for their private healthcare interests.
Yeah, they have reversed all the good stuff that was being put in place by the previous regime...