Statistics? We don't need no stinking statistics!

[Michele 1]

So, being homebound and bored, I cruised around the 'net to see what I could find about fatality statistics. Most of these are old(er) (1998-1999), but they may give a glimpse of the risk factors in some areas of life. I looked for and found some interesting things, and most of the websites were "reputable" (i.e., CDC, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Coast Guard, NHTSA, NOAA). And I will not vouch for the veracity of the stats. I will also state that many times I was unable to locate the comparable rates (per 100,000 deaths? Times per activity? Against population as a whole?) so there is a lot of apples to oranges here (also pears, grapes, bananas, cantaloupe...)
New Cancer reports: 1.4 million per year (US only)
Natural Events (Deaths per year):
Lightning strikes: 51
Tornado: 29
Thunderstorms/Winds: 25
Hail: 2
Cold/Exposure: 15
Heat/Exposure: 158
Flood (flash, river, urban): 37
Marine/Coastal Storm: 25
Winter storm: 33
Avalanche: 12
High Wind: 20
Fire weather: 3 (I don't know what this means....)
SUV Turnover fatalities: 62% of SUV accidents are rollovers.
Total reported deaths from SUV rollovers: 10,694
Motor vehicle deaths: 6,944 (per 100,000 vehicle miles) per year
Per 100,000 deaths:
Poisoning: 2,152 per year
Drowning: 811
Fire: 260
Pedestrian: 136
Boating: 811
"Risk Sports" deaths per year:
Scuba diving: 160 (averaged)
Skiing: 40 per year (averaged)
Skydiving: 30 per year (averaged) (CYPRES: 92% of deaths were "human error") (huge grab bag there)
No interpretation from me. But it looks like I am more likely to get killed by lightning then by skydiving.......
ciel bleu -
Michele

[jfields 0]

Michele,
This has come up on about a million threads so far. And statistics can say anything people want them to, if they try hard enough.
You are correct that more people die from lightning strikes than every year than from skydiving. The misleading part of that is that the lightning number is probably for the US population. So 51/300 million or so people. The skydiving number is only out of skydivers, so 30/I don't know, but much less.
I don't honestly think that skydiving can be considered as safe as not skydiving. But I don't care. I take all the precautions I can and go from there. You have to live somehow, might as well be doing what you want.
Justin
"If it can't kill you, it isn't worth doing."

[DZBone 0]

One thing to keep in mind (whuffos won't hesitate to remind you) is that your risk of death increases over the general population because you skydive, unless you can show that because you skydive, you drive less, or are less likely to be out in a thunderstorm or something. Of course, the increase is less than if you had taken up SCUBA (and dive alone, go below x ft in open water, etc.).
Oh, you aren't passing batons are you?

[favaks 0]

Another way to look at the statistics. Last year, there were 32 fatalities in the US. I counted all but 4 were students--correct me if i'm wrong. USPA membership was at about 35000 last year. That's approximately 28 out of 35000 hardcore brothers and sisters who didn't make it--28/35000, that's a pretty high fatality rate.
-favaks

[DZBone 0]

Dont you mean 4/35000?

[FallinWoman 1]

Then the stats we would need for comparison would be the number of automobile fatalities v. total number of liscensed drivers.
Anyone wanna find those numbers?
Anne

[Dutchboy 0]

You are probably right about the 35000 hard core jumpers in this country. But I believe there are about 400,000 people who skydive each year in the USA.
To make a fair comparison you ought to count all participants, not just frequent ones. Motor vehicle fatality stats don't reflect only hard core drivers that drive alot, but everyone who has driven that year.
The Dutchboy
http://www.geocities.com/ppolstra

[Michele 1]

Fallnwoman, here are the stats from the National Highway Traffic Safety Association (under the DOT):
There were 187.2 million licensed drivers in 1999.
Police reported vehicle crashes: 6,289,000.
Injuries other than fatal: 3,200,000
Fatalities: 42,345
If I've done the math correctly (no guarantee there - my dinosaur 10-key doesn't handle that many zeros, so it's by hand...), that would mean:
187,200,000 licensed drivers to fatalities incurred while driving: .55208%
Possibility of getting into an accident is 5.82%
Whereas in skydiving (again, I am not certain of the statistics),
35,000 licensed jumpers make an estimated 2.5 million jumps per year (median estimation)
20-30 fatalities per year (let's use the high figure: 30)
30 fatalities divided by 35,000 licensed jumpers: .87%
Or
35,000 jumpers make an estimated 2,500,000 combined jumps.
.014 jumps result in death.
Of course, I have utterly confused my poor little brain, so if someone wants to double check the numbers, please don't hesitate to correct me. The stats are directly from the site indicated above.
And as to me bringing up a subject that has been talked about a million times, I do sincerely apologize. I didn't read those threads. I'm sorry for bringing up trampled ground.
ciel bleu -
Michele

[skyhawk 2]

i think we all have to remember that statistics are just that and dont really mean crap. I once saw somthing that had like 20 different statistics that bread was dangerous for you and they where legit eg. 90% off ppl that die ate bread within the last week (that wasnt the statistic but it was stuff like that) things that are extremmly right doesnt mean that what someone is saying is right, plus add this
Most "skydiving accidents" arnt skydiving accidents in freefall they are accident under cannopy
i dont care if you reply to me or not cause im working a 65 hour week this week then going to a boogie see you all the monday after next

[Darkzone 0]

You folks really should get out more
Whooooohooooo!!! Hahahaha!!!

[PhillyKev 0]

I can count to 10!!!!

[SpeedRacer 1]

Yeah, you gotta be careful with these numbers.
If you die by any means after jumping from the plane, its counted as a skydiving fatality.
In the last year there were two deaths of experienced skydivers who happened to have fatal heart attacks while skydiving. These were counted as skydiving fatalities.
Last year there were two suicides while skydiving. Two years ago a guy did a normal skydive, pulled & once under a perfectly good canopy, pulled out a pistol and shot himself. These three suicides were all counted as skydiving fatalities.
Then there are all the weird freak accidents. One guy landed and his chest mounted altimeter just happened to be positioned in a really weird way so that it pressed up into his windpipe & killed him. I'm having trouble even picturing that.
So anyway, I believe that skydiving generally is on a par with driving in terms of safety. Michele must be a scientist or engineer or something Of course, I regularly drive around & near the DC beltway, one of the worst traffic areas in the USA, so I'm probably much safer when I'm skydiving!!
Speed Racer
"De plaene!! De plaene!!"

[wceviper 0]

There is one thing missing from all statistics posted. People are just posting the number of deaths each year per event/sport. The real comparison happens when you compare the number of deaths vs. the number of events that would cause a death. I don't explain things very well; so let me make it a little simpler.
I.E.
Out of over 2 million skydives per year an average of 30 deaths occur.
out of "X" number of lighting strikes per year an average of "X" number of deaths occur.
Out of "X" number of miles driving per year an average of "X" number of deaths occur.
For example, if there are 50 million bolts of lighting that strike each year and 50 people die. That puts your odds at 1 in a million. You would probably be able to stand in the middle of a thunderstorm and only get rained on (Don't try that at home :-P).
If you compare stats like this, 30 out of 35,000 skydivers have fatal accidents each, that doesn't say much. Granted the more people that skydive the higher that number could climb. If you compare that number to 2000 of 35 million people die in fatal accidents every year in California. The more people that get their license, the higher that number goes. But once again, it should be based on miles driven.
In conclusion, for true stats, you should compare the number of X (Deaths) vs. the number of X (Events) that happens each year. That should give you more accurate stats to discuss with your wuffo friends.
Any other opinions or views?
That’s just my 2 cents.
-WCE Viper
P.S. I just added Wuffo as a word in my dictionary so my computer would quit spell checking it! :-D

[skymama 37]

Everytime I point out statistics like this, whuffos tell me that I HAVE to drive, and I don't HAVE to skydive. I just shake my head and smile, and tell them that is where they are wrong. I most certainly HAVE to skydive!!!
On another note, I told my dad the other day that I was up to jump #46. He asked how many I was trying to get to. LOL! I couldn't believe that he doesn't understand yet that there is no ending number. I told him I'll be skydiving as long as the good Lord lets me!
Andrea
"Up high, I feel like I'm alive for the very first time"

[Michele 1]

Morning, Viper
You wrote: "The real comparison is when you compare the number of deaths v. the number of events that would cause a death".
I did just that - on the first post, I compared the number of deaths per 100,000 in things like poisoning, drowning, fire, etc. I did not compare the numbers of events in natural hazards, ie. lightning strikes, because that is not an accurate comparison (one year may have lower storm numbers than another year, one hurricane can kill many at once); I provided them as a snapshot or touchstone, as it were. I did compare the vehicle deaths (6,289 per 100,000 mi/d) to the skydiving stats, but perhaps it wasn't clear. I'll try again.
When it was requested that someone present the numbers as a straight comparison to licensed drivers to licensed skydiviers, I found the numbers, and brought that up in my second post.
So, a straight, Vehicle/100,000 to Skydiving/100,000 comparison would look like this:
Vehicle:
Fatalities per 100,000 miles: Raw data:
6,289,000 police reported accidents; 3,200,000 injuries~41,345 fatalities.
Converted to 100,000 miles driven, it looks like this:
Per 100,000 miles driven: 6,289 accidents
Per 100,000 miles driven: 152.11 accidents which result in a fatality.
Therefore: Per 100,000 miles driven, your chances of having an accident which results in a fatality is 2.42% ([(a)?]/(d)=%)
In skydiving, there are ~2,500,000 jumps made per year. We need to translate the (d):(j) ratio into increments of 100,000. 2,500,000(j) to 100,000 (i) provides a factor of 25 (25x100,000=2,500,000).
Therefore, the formula should look like this: (2.5m)over(d)=% or .0012% or
100,000/.0012= .83% ([(j)?]/(d)=%)
(my brain is all tangled.....)
Side by side, here it is:
v/d per 100k = 2.42%
s/d per 100k= 0.83%
Disclaimer: I have not taken into consideration heart attacks, suicide, or (other). I have not taken into consideration those factors in vehicle deaths, either. I was unable to determine the submorbidity catagories for any of the statistics I quoted above, so used general catagories (e.g.: "poisoning" as opposed to poisoning/murder/accidental/other). Raw, uncrunched numbers, straight comparison, and no interpretation.....
And no, Geekstreak, I am a former housewife, no college or "higher" education, just really curious as to what the numbers showed.
ciel bleu -
Michele

[PhillyKev 0]

Well, now to compare that even more effectively, and to each person personally, you need to figure out how many miles you drive compared to how many skydives you make in the same period of time.
So, if you drive 20,000 miles per year, you have a 0.484% chance of being involved in a fatal car accident (once again this stat is still not accurate, because you would have to divide by the number of people involved in the accident to see what YOUR chance of death is.)
If in the same period of time (1 year) you make 100 jumps, that would be a 0.00083% chance of dying in that year.
Assuming that the average number of people involved in a fatal car accident is 2, your chance of death would then be reduced further to 0.242%. If you assume 4 people involved in the crash, it's further reduced to 0.121% chance.
Based on those numbers though, it definitely seems that skydiving is safer.

[wceviper 0]

That clears things up alot, Its kinda scary knowing that no matter what people do, it can become a comparable statistic! Great job on the formulas! I guess the only other thing to do would be to break them down by skydiving activity. I am sure Low turns would have the majority of deaths vs. everything else(Skyboarding, wingsuits).
-Viper

[cloud9 0]

Well here's a stat from personal observation. After 11 years in Law Enforcement I found that nearly 100% of people will be in a car accident in there life time either as a driver or passenger. Sounds real high doesn't it. Well do your own survey. I have been in several and I have 4 drivers in my house all of us have been in at least one accident. Also there are a total of 7 of us at home and all have been in a car that was in an accident, if not as a driver then as a passenger. So my house is 100% how about the rest of you guys? Have you been involved in an accident?
Some fun eh!

[Michele 1]

Hit by a car at 7 years old (aka first attempt at flying...lol).
Not at fault accident 7 years ago.
Not at fault accident 6.8 years ago
At fault accident 1 year ago.
My stats cover my entire family!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol
Speedy, I got you confused w/Geekstreak in comments - sorry.
Ciel Bleu
Michele

[Grogs 0]

Quote

Vehicle:
Fatalities per 100,000 miles: Raw data:
6,289,000 police reported accidents; 3,200,000 injuries~41,345 fatalities.
Converted to 100,000 miles driven, it looks like this:
Per 100,000 miles driven: 6,289 accidents
Per 100,000 miles driven: 152.11 accidents which result in a fatality.
Therefore: Per 100,000 miles driven, your chances of having an accident which results in a fatality is 2.42% ([(a)?]/(d)=%)

I think you messed a few numbers up here...
Total miles driven in 1999=2,691,335,000,000
37063 fatal accidents/2,691,335,000,000*100,000=0.0014=0.14% chance of dying per 100,000 miles driven
Given that the average number of miles driven/year is around 14,000 (# of miles driven/# of licensed drivers), the odds a typical person will be killed in a car crash in a given year are about 0.02%
The odds of dying on one skydive are about 30/3,400,000 or 0.00088%. 23 skydives gives you about the same odds as driving 14,000 miles
The odds of dying on a tandem are probably even lower since there were about 180,000 in 1999, and the number of tandem fatalities is less than 1/year, resulting in a roughly 0.00056% chance of dying on 1 tandem skydive.
In any case, I think no matter how you run the numbers, skydiving isn't greatly more dangerous than driving around in your car, but remember, they're just that: statistics. If you run around doing stupid stuff all the time, your odds of being in the small percentage of fatalities greatly increases.

[JeffGordon 0]

how about this? I drive around 150 miles per week to work, grocery shop etc.
I drive 400+ miles to and from the drop zone on the weekend.

[mouth 0]

Well, we know what is important to you.

[Michele 1]

Thanks, Grogs....
It looks like I used a different number set that you did. Where'd you get the data? I must have missed something (I took mine from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration site). In the data set for sydiving, I used a median number (2.5 million) as opposed to your hard number (3.4). And it was a straight comparison of 100k~m/100k~j, rather than typical miles driven/number of skydives made. But no problem - I appreciate your correcting me - I can always learn.
Thanks again -
Ciel bleu-
Michele

[Michele 1]

Jeff -
"I drive 400+ miles to and from the drop zone on the weekend".
Let's factor that out (lol) If you go every weekend, 52 weeks per year, you will be driving 20,800 miles. Now compare your average weekend jump number to that data set (Unknown/?[average 5 jumps per day, 2 days=10 per week]). According to the numbers, you are more likely to die in a car accident than you are jumping. No, wait, you're more likely to die diving....no, wait, I forgot about the grocery shopping, so car it is...no wait, you might do a low turn, so there's new data.....
I got it! Walk to the DZ off the road, and then just watch!!!!!!!!!!!
(I gotta go to work!!!!!!!!!!) lol
Ciel Bleu -
Michele

[lazerq3 0]

Heres a statisic for you all.... You have a 100% fatality rate the minute you are born. The question now becomes when.