 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
[url= http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28015946 ]BBC link[/url]
"Road casualties in Scotland down 10% as pedestrian deaths fall
The number of people killed and injured on Scotland's roads fell by 10% last year thanks to a reduction in pedestrian fatalities.
[b]But there was an increase in the number of cyclists, motorcyclists and car users killed.
[/b]Total casualties were down from 12,722 to 11,493 - the lowest since records began - according to Transport Scotland Statisticians.
Fatalities fell by 3% from 178 to 172 and serious injuries by 16% to 1,667.
Of the nine children killed, five were walking, two were cycling and two were travelling by car.
Overall, 1,062 children were injured or killed on the roads, a fall of 9%.
Casualty numbers for all modes of transport fell, including 12% for pedestrians, 11% for motorcyclists and 3% for cyclists."
So i went over to transport scotland and downloaded the stats
first thing is apparent is they looked at the brighter side of the stats, but what is not shown is 2012 was in itself was a much [b]bigger [/b]year than before for casualties for riders - probably due to the fact of the increase in popularity of cycling, so more people on the road.
if you actually took it over the 5 year average figures they themselves have produced they reveal a much disturbing figure - I'll try and paste it in here :
Pedal cycle (merging built up and non built up casualty figure)
Year / killed / serious
2004-08 average / 9 / 134
2011 / 7 / 156
2012 / 9 / 168
2013 / 13 / 148
% change on 2012 /[b]+44%[/b] /-12%
on 04-08 average /[b]+41%[/b] /+10%
a 44% or 41% increase in deaths 2013 is the 3rd BIGGEST year in deaths in the total since records began around 1990.
despite "the XXXX millions of investment in cycle lanes and investment"
we get spouted at year upon year, death upon death.
the only way they got that -3% figure was to add a variety of figures
of all injuries and compared it to 2012 only (906 compared to 882 = -3%)
almost every other figure showed an increase.
i do not think it is helpful to base any conclusion on one year tbh
We also need to know things like Number cycling and miles cycled as well
if 2012 was 200 cyclist who cycle 1000 miles and 2013 was 1 million who cycled 10 million then we have different conclusions as well
tha article starts with
The number of people killed and injured on Scotland's roads fell by 10% last year thanks to a reduction in pedestrian fatalities.But there was an increase in the number of cyclists, motorcyclists and car users killed.
They seem to accept that they are combining and highlight cyclist deaths
Hooray for....
[img] 
[/img]
@junkyard, yup i understand they acknowledge but perhaps it should start with :
"above 40% increase on cycle deaths in Scotland over the past 5 years"
"scottish government failing cyclists on deaths"
etc
yeah i know i biased being a cyclist.
The numbers are too small- yes any death is bad news but it only takes a swing of 1 to change your alarming 44% into 33%. Using KSI as the stat gives a much bigger result which stabilises things and gives more meaningful results (bearing in mind that the difference between a fatality and serious injury is often small- the exact same collision could lead to either, depending on the person involved, ambulance response times, and blind luck.
And as you say there are (apparently) more riders. And you can't just simply apply a modifier (ie, 10% more riders so the stats should go up by 10%) because new riders will be less experienced and more likely to be involved in collisions, and may have different riding habits- with an increase in commuters you'd expect to see an increase in collisions per mile, etc.