home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!att!drutx!druhi!car377
- From: car377@druhi.ATT.COM (RogersC)
- Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
- Subject: Re: Saturday night COPS on FOX
- Summary: The Holy Scripture of Statistics
- Message-ID: <22473@drutx.ATT.COM>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 17:12:53 GMT
- References: <RTARAZ.92Nov14211852@bigwpi.WPI.EDU> <1434@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> <1992Nov17.033630.5630@tcsi.com>
- Sender: news@drutx.ATT.COM
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <1992Nov17.033630.5630@tcsi.com>, markk@tcs.com (Mark Kromer) writes:
- >
- > "Say on a per mile basis someone is five times (I don't know the actual
- > figure and would appreciate it if anyone knows) as likely to be killed
- > on a motorcycle than in a car. That means that every 5 miles you
- > travel in your car is as risky as one mile on a motorcycle.
-
- No, it doesn't mean that at all. There isn't any "actual" figure because
- such figures are gross averages of poorly collected (and even more
- poorly organized and processed) data.
-
- The figures only apply to YOU if YOU are BOTH the average cager AND
- the average motorcyclist, and if your exposure to risk factors happens
- to be the same as the "average" person described by the statistic for
- the time/place/conditions of the statistic. If you've taken an MSF
- course, don't do social drugs and ride/drive, have acquired a valid
- MC license, and wear appropriate safety equipment, you have already,
- by your risk-management strategy, placed yourself well outside the set
- of riders described by the statistic. The number is meaningless, but
- when it is used in the above context to describe how dangerous an
- activity is, it promotes the illusion that risk is somehow a fixed
- environmental factor not affected by the preparation/strategies of
- the described population. That's BS.
-
-