Road deaths rocket by 3,000 as Thailand set to be named world number one in carnage, say academics

[transam]

1 minute ago, ZeVonderBearz said:

Why do people need to be careful on the roads? Surely if they die on the road they'll just be reincarnated and then reclaim the vehicle that they crashed in the pre-reincarnation life. Maybe that explains how some people can afford to have several pickups parked outside their shack like homes. 

[Vintage]

how can you tell if you can't see through the window?

You don’t need to see their faces the driving style tells all.
But then again many Asians and not just Thais are never taught to think constructively or even question any method they are taught and often they sit a short test and learn from a book in many subjects.
On the whole they lack consideration for other road users and no doubt this leads to many fatalities.
Basically a combination of thinking your right because you have never dared question a method and selfishness leaves them in this situation.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[HHTel]

7 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

Yes it does, but on roads with two or more lanes, from the Thai Traffic Laws, overtaking on the left (undertaking) is legal, whereas in most western countries it is not.

No it is not legal.  Commonly misunderstood here.

 

See sections 34 and 35.

 

[Jonah Tenner]

My vehicle of choice for driving in Thailand...

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been reported and removed.  

[Keesters]

19 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

This actually means that cars are one of the safest ways to travel and about as safe as the USA.

 

 

So you say but with no evidence/quoted sources who will believe you. And surely the latest figures are the ones to be considered replacing all previous.

[Airbagwill]

2 minutes ago, Keesters said:

 

So you say but with no evidence/quoted sources who will believe you. And surely the latest figures are the ones to be considered replacing all previous.

People with no argument always claim "no evidence" - its not an argument.

Firstly where is YOUR evidence??

Secondly if you read my post earlier, you will see my evidence

 

If you are going to comment on road safety, at least take the time to get yourself correctly informed of the facts.

you might also try to find out who supplied the figures used in this article.

Basically you are totally incorrect on every point you try to make.

[Keesters]

6 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

People with no argument always claim "no evidence" - its not an argument.

Firstly where is YOUR evidence??

Secondly if you read my post earlier, you will see my evidence

 

If you are going to comment on road safety, at least take the time to get yourself correctly informed of the facts.

you might also try to find out who supplied the figures used in this article.

Basically you are totally incorrect on every point you try to make.

People with no argument always "make up figures". It is not an argument.

 

Facts are the only thing I'll believe. This thread is my evidence and I quoted the OP. You have quoted nothing just written a load of figures pulled from thin air which of course I did read but with no idea where they came from why should I or anybody believe them. Even if they did exist they will be old figures replaced by the ones in this thread. Who wants old figures, they are outdated.

 

So you are the one incorrect.

 

 

[agudbuk]

Statistics can be disputed as to accuracy but here is a link to the latest wikopedia information.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

[Airbagwill]

2 hours ago, agudbuk said:

Statistics can be disputed as to accuracy but here is a link to the latest wikopedia information.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

THese wiki stats are from WHO - who use a meta-analysis of the sources I mentioned.

The RTP have been shown in 2013 to be totally inaccurate and are only part of the stats used. there are 9 other sources in Thailand - 3 main ones. (see above)

The official international definition for  (used by WHO) is death within 30 days of an accident.

the WHO have been compiling these sort of stats worldwide for some time and are about the most reliable you can find.

If you want to read up on their methodology, you  can find it in the @015 report.

There is also a separate paper for the collating and analysing of statistics.

 

These stats also CLEARLY show the shortcomings in Thailand’s gathering of statistics - there are NO VKT figures whatsoever and the figures for death/serious injury/minor injury don’t exist in any meaningful form either.

The result is that most people in Thailand rely on one single set of stats for their highly subjective and untutored observations which leads to horrendous misunderstandings of what is actually happening with Thai road safety. Just read most of the post on this thread - they are highly misinformed and wildly inaccurate in their observations and conclusions. There is scant regard to scientific procedure just the presumption that because they can drive they must be an expert on road safety - they don’t even know that they aren’t thee same thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2017 by Airbagwill

[ChristianBlessing]

When you look at road safety, you need to see the matter in context - Thailand is undergoing a perfect storm.
A massive subsidised industry, subsidised car ownership has lead to very sharp increase in the number of vehicles on the road, a really unhealthy combination of vehicles (e.g. fast and slow) and no road traffic engineering and design to protect vulnerable road users (80% of casualties), an appalling road building/transport plan, dreadful emergency services total ignorance of road safety science by policymakers.
 
Thailand needs to adopt internationality accepted road safety strategies if they don’t then it is not surprising if death rates will escalate. -
 
In 1970s Europe and the USA went through similar exponential increases in the number of vehicles on the roads (mostly cars) and the USA actually had higher death rates than Thailand does now (except they were mostly 4 wheeled!!!) - USA managed 25 per 100k and France managed over 30 per 100k!!! - so all American and European drivers were stupid then and clever now or did they do something else?
 
...how did they deal with it?
Well in the USA, not very well if the truth be known, their death rates are still 4 to 6 times higher than many countries in Europe...but they have improved. After an initial drop, in the last 25 years deaths in the US have only reduced slightly whereas the policies in Europe have brought about substantial improvement - so Europeans clever/Americans stupid?...or is there more to road safety than “driving and drivers???
 
Europe on the other hand in keeping with the EU policies developed a road safety system that within 20 year had reduced the carnage to a trickle.  
 
Thailand needs to adopt these strategies - the work has been done - the principles are established and all that Thailand has to do is implement these programs.
It's not valid to suggest that "Thailand is different" - any “differences” - they are NOT cultural or racial, are in implementation - the principles are universal and scientific, just as sure as the Earth revolves around the Sun.; the laws of physics apply everywhere on the planet and they just need to be applied in Thailand - unfortunately it seems the powers that be don't know what those laws are.
 
BTW - for those who have a problem with how the stats are complied - there are 3 authorities in Thailand that compile the stats.
 
“there are currently 10 [conflicting? - ABW] data sources for road safety including police information system, e-claims, trauma registries and death certificates. These data are collected by seven agencies for different purposes and with the use of different definitions. Although there is currently a plan to link the police, hospital, and insurance data to improve mortality estimates, these linkages have yet to be undertaken. Presently, the most commonly referenced data are from the Royal Thai Police.”
“Road Safety Institutional and Legal Assessment Thailand” - WHO.
 
Road death definiton
 
- International definition for killed was defined in the 1968 Vienna convention: « A victim of a road accident is recorded as killed as a result of the accident if they died at the time or within the thirty days which follow the accident
 
PPS - Currently, In a 4 wheeled vehicle in Thailand you stand abut the same chance of being killed as in the USA.

While I agree with your analysis I'm curious about your "PPS". In the US fatalities per 100,000 vehicles is roughly 13, while in Thailand it's 75. How do you determine that in a 4 wheeled vehicle a Thai faces nearly the same risk as a driver in the US. If automobile deaths account for half of road fatalities in the Thailand the risk (in Thailand) still stands at around 37-38.

Sent from my Mi A1 using Tapatalk

[Airbagwill]

57 minutes ago, ChristianBlessing said:

While I agree with your analysis I'm curious about your "PPS". In the US fatalities per 100,000 vehicles is roughly 13, while in Thailand it's 75. How do you determine that in a 4 wheeled vehicle a Thai faces nearly the same risk as a driver in the US. If automobile deaths account for half of road fatalities in the Thailand the risk (in Thailand) still stands at around 37-38.

Sent from my Mi A1 using Tapatalk
 

Your premise is wrong - 4 wheeled private vehicles account for about 16% of road deaths. (WHO)

Road deaths - if you accept the current stats are 80% vulnerable road users - 75 % are 2 and 3 wheeled - if you work it out from the remainders this means that the DP100K for 4 wheelers (about 16%) works out about the same rate as the USA.

 

..and in 1973 - the US death rate was over 25 per 100k and that was a majority of 4 wheeled vehicles.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Airbagwill

[jojothai]

4 hours ago, Keesters said:

People with no argument always "make up figures". It is not an argument.

 

Facts are the only thing I'll believe. This thread is my evidence and I quoted the OP. You have quoted nothing just written a load of figures pulled from thin air which of course I did read but with no idea where they came from why should I or anybody believe them. Even if they did exist they will be old figures replaced by the ones in this thread. Who wants old figures, they are outdated.

 

So you are the one incorrect.

 

 

How can anybody assume that the figures provided at the start of this thread by these "experts" are  correct?

As pointed out by Airbagwill there are different sets of statistics.

Since when is the population of Thailand just over 60 million? Figures I see online indicate 69 million.

 

According to the WHO report there were 36.2 deaths per 100,000.

For 22356 deaths That gives 32.4 deaths per 100k. - ie less than the WHO report. 

So things have improved since 2015 

Why do these experts have 3000 less deaths for 2015 than the WHO report? Should the 2016 figure be 3000 higher?

 

45% involve motorcyles???? Nonsense. Most all the other statistics I see indicate it is over 70%.

Statistics normally indicate a far bigger percentage of deaths involving motorbikes so i fail to have much confidence in what they state. 

It is good to highlight that there was a major increase and emphasize how bad they are to the public,

but just as important to assess where the increases happened to see if any particular factors can be identified. Nothing is stated on that count. 

 

 

 

 

[Airbagwill]

2 hours ago, jojothai said:

How can anybody assume that the figures provided at the start of this thread by these "experts" are  correct?

As pointed out by Airbagwill there are different sets of statistics.

Since when is the population of Thailand just over 60 million? Figures I see online indicate 69 million.

 

According to the WHO report there were 36.2 deaths per 100,000.

For 22356 deaths That gives 32.4 deaths per 100k. - ie less than the WHO report. 

So things have improved since 2015 

Why do these experts have 3000 less deaths for 2015 than the WHO report? Should the 2016 figure be 3000 higher?

 

45% involve motorcyles???? Nonsense. Most all the other statistics I see indicate it is over 70%.

Statistics normally indicate a far bigger percentage of deaths involving motorbikes so i fail to have much confidence in what they state. 

It is good to highlight that there was a major increase and emphasize how bad they are to the public,

but just as important to assess where the increases happened to see if any particular factors can be identified. Nothing is stated on that count. 

 

 

 

 

This is really the heart of the problem....the Thai government has no idea of what is really going on and doesn't have the necessary infrastructure in place to collate and analyse the situation. Outside bodies - e.g. WHO do the best they can with the information available but if you look at their stats there are whole columns missing for Thailand where the stats simply aren't collected.

 

(It is also a hame that people feel they can comment on this without even identifying what a fact is or understanding the difference between "fact" and reasoned opinion, neither of which they can do anyhow).

[transam]

8 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

This is really the heart of the problem....the Thai government has no idea of what is really going on and doesn't have the necessary infrastructure in place to collate and analyse the situation. Outside bodies - e.g. WHO do the best they can with the information available but if you look at their stats there are whole columns missing for Thailand where the stats simply aren't collected.

 

(It is also a hame that people feel they can comment on this without even identifying what a fact is or understanding the difference between "fact" and reasoned opinion, neither of which they can do anyhow).

But you fail to see why folk are being wiped out on the LOS roads...And why, because you think like a farang, don't understand folk in the LOS region...

Tell me/us, how long have you lived 24/7 in LOS....?

[ThaiTrav]

On 14/11/2017 at 1:21 PM, Happyman58 said:

Transport ministry take a bow You made it to No1  Why dont you have another meeting to see what you can do about it ?Went for my walk this morning and saw the same ole same ole  Cars running red lights Cars going up the wrong way No helmets Its like a bloody jungle out there  A mob of chooks driving around like there is no tomorrow The answer is simple Get the police to do there jobs and start booking lawbreakers But might as well talk to the brick wall One again Thailand Congratulations you made it to No 1 Hooray

I watched the cops from afar the other night pulling up traffic at 2am in the morning . Whilst they breath test one motorbike 10 go past with no helmet . The cars were a bit too overpowering for the on foot cops the just look in the drivers windows no testing at all. 

its a joke ,in honesty i think it was a money extortion exercise . IT WILL NEVER ChANGE . The cops really need to go to proper cop school. Well outnumbered by the disobeying public  farangs too !!would you believe it!

[Happyman58]

16 minutes ago, ThaiTrav said:

I watched the cops from afar the other night pulling up traffic at 2am in the morning . Whilst they breath test one motorbike 10 go past with no helmet . The cars were a bit too overpowering for the on foot cops the just look in the drivers windows no testing at all. 

its a joke ,in honesty i think it was a money extortion exercise . IT WILL NEVER ChANGE . The cops really need to go to proper cop school. Well outnumbered by the disobeying public  farangs too !!would you believe it!

Yep ur spot on Its a bloody joke Trouble is the joke is killing people

[ThaiTrav]

1 minute ago, Happyman58 said:

Yep ur spot on Its a bloody joke Trouble is the joke is killing people

Well on a brighter note : Johnny bought himself a brand new motorbike and was showing it off to Harry.

"You'll need to buy a helmet as driving in Thailand is dangerous "said Harry . "What kind of one shall I buy ?"said Johnny.

"Oh if I were you I'd buy the best one your money can buy "said Harry! So when Johnny had his accident and his head came off, Harry was talking to a fellow friend Mick. "Well at least he listened to my advice said Harry" . "Why's that ?" said Mick!

...."cause when they found his helmet ,his head was still in it!!!!

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post commenting on moderation has been removed. 

[slippery snake]

wow,,  sex capital of the world,  plus number 1 in road carnage.. 

Not many countries can clam 2 number ones..   well done Thailand.. 

[Keesters]

17 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

This is really the heart of the problem....the Thai government has no idea of what is really going on and doesn't have the necessary infrastructure in place to collate and analyse the situation. Outside bodies - e.g. WHO do the best they can with the information available but if you look at their stats there are whole columns missing for Thailand where the stats simply aren't collected.

 

(It is also a hame that people feel they can comment on this without even identifying what a fact is or understanding the difference between "fact" and reasoned opinion, neither of which they can do anyhow).

But the figures are what they are without evidence to the contrary.

 

And as to the WHO figures I doubt they actually collect them. I'd bet they are based upon figures given to them by Thai authorities.

[Wanderlust]

On 11/15/2017 at 10:46 PM, HHTel said:

No it is not legal.  Commonly misunderstood here.

 

See sections 34 and 35.

 

Yes it is. See section 45.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 4:44 PM, Thaidream said:

Speed does kill- I was an accident investigator for 15 years in California and the majority of accidents were as a result of excessive speed and not from any other cause. The same is true of Thailand.

 

Thais drive way too fast on every type of roadway ; every type of weather; and every situation- they ignore all speed limits and even the police if they can. The only way to change the behavior is through a massive public relations program started at school level. I am almost convinced that current drivers are impossible to change- there is not enough police to enforce speed limits and poor driving so there is no consequence for bad driving except death and even that does not slow down the other family members of the deceased.

 

Indeed, some of it is cultural in that Thais are fatalistic- and do not dwell on potential situations and consequences.

I understand why you want education for driving, but in reality that is not the priority in LOS, which as far more serious problems. However, nothing will be done about the more serious problems and hence will not happen on driver ed. It's just not the culture.

While farangs may wring their hands and write lengthy posts on TVF , the Thais are the only ones that can or will ( or will not ) deal with the situation, and so far they are just not that into it.

IMO it would require a complete cultural change and will take generations to happen.

There have been a great many changes in LOS since I first arrived many, many moons ago, but few, if any, have been to the betterment of Thai society, and I can't see that changing any time soon.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 5:11 PM, Zendo said:

I can see only one future with less accidents in Thailand and it might come faster than we think, I am talking about self driving car, because I'll trust more a computer with all his bugs and problems than any Thai Driving on roads. And That will be the best combination because people will be able to chat, to take selfies, to eat or have sex while ine the car.. but Safely !!  Hope for that future to come FAST in LOS^^

 

 

and for the motorbikes.. Honda just make one too which is called  "Honda Riding Assist".

 

Also, instead of buying submarines they might consider building mortobikes airbags localy to reduce the cost and protect really the drivers, but even for Free, most of people here won't use it, too hot, not free anymore, boring, etc... And Accident could not happen to them..only to others, relatives, familly, neighbours: YES but not for them.. specially when wearing amulets: INVICIBLE !

 

 

 

 

555555555555555555555555555

They can't even make the pedestrian lights work in Pattaya- what chance would a self driving car have?

Anyway, how many million cars already on Thai roads? How long would it be before all would be replaced?

[HHTel]

23 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

Yes it is. See section 45.

As I said, commonly misunderstood.  Section b is correct and refers to lanes of traffic.  i.e. if the traffic in your lane is going faster than the traffic to your right, then it's legal to 'undertake'.  However, if the the lane you're in is devoid of traffic, then the offender is in the outermost lane.  By undertaking that makes you an offender also. (2 wrongs!).  People do get pulled over for being on the outermost lane when there is no traffic on the nearside lanes. (although rarely).  Try quoting Section 45 to the police and they will put you right.

[jojothai]

1 hour ago, HHTel said:

As I said, commonly misunderstood.  Section b is correct and refers to lanes of traffic.  i.e. if the traffic in your lane is going faster than the traffic to your right, then it's legal to 'undertake'.  However, if the the lane you're in is devoid of traffic, then the offender is in the outermost lane.  By undertaking that makes you an offender also. (2 wrongs!).  People do get pulled over for being on the outermost lane when there is no traffic on the nearside lanes. (although rarely).  Try quoting Section 45 to the police and they will put you right.

That logic means that if there are some cars in front of me undertaking some idiot going slowly on the outside lane then it is quite alright to do so in the same lane.

When the traffic in the outside lane is travelling very slowly compared to other traffic then surely they are in lane to turn right? ( 45a ).

Even if it is 5 to 10 Km further down the road.  

[agudbuk]

When a single lane road approaches a town or village and becomes a two lane road the traffic is initially directed into the outside lane. So natural to continue in that lane.

[jojothai]

42 minutes ago, agudbuk said:

When a single lane road approaches a town or village and becomes a two lane road the traffic is initially directed into the outside lane. So natural to continue in that lane.

Understand and I have seen what you are saying, but most towns where single becomes twin lane tend to have a right turn / u turn in the town area and the outside lane can be a major hazard because there may be no right turn filter lane or stopped traffic.

You often don't know who is turning right and when,  and have to be careful to watch for opposite traffic turning sticking out to get a better traffic view.

I note this is improving over the years as they put in filter lanes where there are accidents, but some are not long enough. Then they may end up having to add traffic lights, seen this happen in places.

 

There are a good number of places I know where it is safer to move inside and assume somebody will be turning right.

This quite often results in undertaking because of slow moving traffic in the outside lane that is not turning right.

They are just blinkered to carry on straight ahead. As you say the 1 lane may get directed into the outside.

These situations can also cause aggravation as some drivers realising they are trapped outside try to force into the inner  lane.

[MaxYakov]

My GF told me today that a car hit her and severely injured her while she was riding her motorbike. She is very competent and careful even when cycling.

 

She said it was an "accident" but could not describe it or how it happened. Thinking about this I came to his conclusion - There aren't any "accidents". People get injured or die on the road for the following three reasons:

 

1) Human error, incompetence, reduced capability, distraction, recklessness, etc.

2) Equipment or road failure - possibly due to #1, above.

3) Natural events such as lightning, flash floods, etc.

 

IMHO, none of the above are "accidents"! They are root causes which result in untoward consequences that kill and injure humans on the roads.

Edited November 19, 2017 by MaxYakov

[Sid Celery]

33 minutes ago, agudbuk said:

 

I think that is going back in time a fair while.
Same could be said of some European banks or saying some US banks received money from slave owners in the past.

 

 

Maybe, but it was a crime then as now. And the fact that other banks were nefarious in their dealings does not excuse this one. The 'never mind me, how about him' excuse has never carried much weight, it's always been a dodgy diversion.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Sid Celery