Thailand ranks world no.2 in road fatalities

[Lite Beer]

Thailand ranks world no.2 in road fatalities

BANGKOK, 3 Jan 2015 (NNT) – Danger-prone road conditions and recklessness of motorists have made Thailand become one of the three countries with the highest numbers of traffic fatalities in the world.

Based on the statistics of the World Health Organization and University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Thailand is ranked second in terms of traffic fatalities with 44 deaths per a population of 100,000 per year.

Coming first and third are Namibia and Iran with 45 and 38 fatalities per a population of 100,000 respectively. According to the global statistics, the average number of people died in road accidents is 18 per a population of 100,000 per year.

Analysts said the high number of fatalities not only resulted from motorists’ carelessness alone. Accident-prone road conditions were also to blame for the tragedy. The Ministry of Public Health meanwhile revealed that nearly 500 accidents occurred at U-turns over the past year.

-- NNT 2015-01-04

[WhamBam]

As Thailand strives to become Number 1 ........

[uptheos]

Coming second to Namibia they ought to be ashamed of themselves..........surely they could have tried harder for No 1 spot.

[espinoza]

"Analysts said the high number of fatalities not only resulted from motorists’ carelessness alone." Off course not. Government negligence is the main reason.

[phetmike]

And these are only the ones that actually die ON the road. Well,---- what will the authorities do about it? Nothing but pious words as usual. The police just watch for the opportunity to make money, not safety.

[hansgruber]

TAT should market Thailand as a euthanasia destination with this accolade.

[Bullie]

Looks like Thailand is striving to be the HUB of road fatalities - finally, an achievable hub!

[Thailand]

Always next year, and then the current incumbents will be likely to preside over another 1st.

[lildragon]

For me the driving here is one the most 'un-Buddhist' things about living in this country. "Me me me, I'm first! I most make it to my destination mili seconds faster than you, out of my way! I'll kill you or die trying to be first!" It makes a mockery of all the lucky charms they plaster all over their cars.

[djjamie]

What a terrible achievement.

We have 2 children under 7 years of age and we also have 2 child seats in the car knowing full well that Thailand's roads are a death trap yet after all my years in Thailand I have never seen anyone else use child seats with their children. In fact it amazes me how often I see a child sitting on the lap of they mother in the front seat with no seat belt on and a passenger side airbag.

I asked my wife's sister who does that as well why she allows it. She told me the airbag will protect them if they are in an accident!! Or the other one I get if the mother is wearing the seat belt is she will hold onto her child in the case of an accident so the child will be safe.

That mentality is why Thais have the 2nd most fatalities in the world.

Education. Education. Education. It is the key to democracy and to safer roads.

Edited January 4, 2015 by djjamie

[Crazy chef 1]

another great achievement???

[TheCornerShop]

No surprise really,just count our blessings every day and survive the journeys we have to make as it is mostly someone else'e fault when accidents happen...I am invincible because i went to the temple and paid a monk to ramble on for 30 seconds and have some white string tied around my bike there is so much of it i could hang myself with it if i don't have an accident and the car well.....same same around the steering wheel and i could of sworn the kids have been scrawling white paint on the inside roof...bloody mess it looks and the flowers that die after one day around my rear view mirror and always obscuring my view....but...you know.... a quiet life an all that

Here's to next year and being number one.

[apetley]

What a terrible achievement.

We have 2 children under 7 years of age and we also have 2 child seats in the car knowing full well that Thailand's roads are a death trap yet after all my years in Thailand I have never seen anyone else use child seats with their children. In fact it amazes me how often I see a child sitting on the lap of they mother in the front seat with no seat belt on and a passenger side airbag.

I asked my wife's sister who does that as well why she allows it. She told me the airbag will protect them if they are in an accident!! Or the other one I get if the mother is wearing the seat belt is she will hold onto her child in the case of an accident so the child will be safe.

That mentality is why Thais have the 2nd most fatalities in the world.

Education. Education. Education. It is the key to democracy and to safer roads.

On my second trip here I witnessed the most horrific accident I have ever seen when a pickup crashed into the back of another stationary one waiting to turn right. Counted 7 bodies 2 of which were a mother still clinging to her baby.

[T_Dog]

And these are only the ones that actually die ON the road. Well,---- what will the authorities do about it? Nothing but pious words as usual. The police just watch for the opportunity to make money, not safety.

There have been posts in the past that Thailand has THE most dangerous highways as only deaths at the scene are included in the statistics, and many motorcycle accidents do not make it into the counts. It might already be in the number one position.

[paddyjenkins]

Thailand, global hub of road maiming and deaths

[Misterwhisper]

I normally dislike those "xx deaths per xx population" statistics, because they are sometimes misleading. You can get a much more accurate picture of the real road carnage if you look at the total population of a country.

For example, Namibia has a population of just 2.1 million. Applying the statistical figure of 45 deaths per 100,000 people to this, we get an overall road toll of 945 people per year.

Thailand, on the other hand, has a population of roughly 65 million, translating into 28,600 road deaths per year.

Iran has 78 million, which considering they have "only" 38 road fatalities per 100,000, calculates as a total of 29,640 road deaths per year.

Suddenly, Namibia doesn't look so bad anymore, does it? But Thailand can certainly shake hands with Iran. They're in the same league.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Misterwhisper

[cooked]

I normally dislike those "xx deaths per xx population" statistics, because they are sometimes misleading. You can get a much more accurate picture of the real road carnage if you look at the total population of a country.

For example, Namibia has a population of just 2.1 million. Applying the statistical figure of 45 deaths per 100,000 people to this, we get an overall road toll of 945 people per year.

Thailand, on the other hand, has a population of roughly 65 million, translating into 28,600 road deaths per year.

Iran has 78 million, which considering they have "only" 38 road fatalities per 100,000, calculates as a total of 29,640 road deaths per year.

Suddenly, Namibia doesn't look so bad anymore, does it? But Thailand can certainly shake hands with Iran. They're in the same league.

Eh? So if a country has a population of 10 and 5 get wiped out in an accident, that's better? Maybe you dislike this kind of statistic because you don't understand them.

[MJP]

I don't mean to drag this off-topic. But considering Thailand's ghastly record of road safety, which regular car is the safest most crash worthy in Thailand? Which car are you most likely to survive in?

We need to take action. May as well make this thread something other than the usual sound bites.

[Thai at Heart]

To be number 1!

[Seligne2]

The 2013 WHO Report on Road Safety is here: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/

It makes for interesting reading and details exactly how to get fatalities reduced.

74% of Thailand's road fatalities are in/on/driving 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles. Cars and trucks, not so much!

[Thai at Heart]

And these are only the ones that actually die ON the road. Well,---- what will the authorities do about it? Nothing but pious words as usual. The police just watch for the opportunity to make money, not safety.

There have been posts in the past that Thailand has THE most dangerous highways as only deaths at the scene are included in the statistics, and many motorcycle accidents do not make it into the counts. It might already be in the number one position.

I think they should ask for a recount.

[MJP]

The 2013 WHO Report on Road Safety is here: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/

It makes for interesting reading and details exactly how to get fatalities reduced.

74% of Thailand's road fatalities are in/on/driving 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles. Cars and trucks, not so much!

It's always going to be those little moped things whacking up the statistics.

There was a time these things would only do 30mph, you know, years ago. But now a 125cc, well you can crank 80mph out of some of these wee things. If you're not a big fat lump that is, I can only get about 45 at best.

[phuketandsee]

As bad as it is here you guys should try driving in Vietnam. The only reason their fatalities are lower is lack of cars and fewer roads to speed on. Wait a few years

[Pattaya28]

Westerners wear a seat-belt in case an accident will happen.

Thais do not wear wear a seat-belt believing an accident will not happen.

Westerners wear seat-belts because it's the law, and respect the law.

Thais do not wear seat-belts because they have no respect for the law or their own safety.

[Misterwhisper]

I normally dislike those "xx deaths per xx population" statistics, because they are sometimes misleading. You can get a much more accurate picture of the real road carnage if you look at the total population of a country.

For example, Namibia has a population of just 2.1 million. Applying the statistical figure of 45 deaths per 100,000 people to this, we get an overall road toll of 945 people per year.

Thailand, on the other hand, has a population of roughly 65 million, translating into 28,600 road deaths per year.

Iran has 78 million, which considering they have "only" 38 road fatalities per 100,000, calculates as a total of 29,640 road deaths per year.

Suddenly, Namibia doesn't look so bad anymore, does it? But Thailand can certainly shake hands with Iran. They're in the same league.

Eh? So if a country has a population of 10 and 5 get wiped out in an accident, that's better? Maybe you dislike this kind of statistic because you don't understand them.

What are you talking about??? Are you sure YOU understand statistics?

For a country with an assumed population of 10 people (which one?) to have half of its population wiped out in traffic accidents over the course of one year would mean it'd need to have a statistical road fatality rate of either 50,000 people per 100,000 population (if we stick to the deaths/100,000 parameter) or, alternatively, a road death toll of 50 % of the total population per year. Both are ludicrous figures.

The smallest sovereign country on Earth currently is Vatican City with a total population of 839 people (2012 figure). It's actual road fatality rate is 0 people per 100,000.

But even if we assume that 2 persons out of those 839 potentially would fall victim to a traffic accident in the Vatican gardens (perhaps by crashing the Papal vehicle against a tree?), the statistical road toll STILL would be 0 per 100,000 - or if you want to be pedantically accurate, it would actually be 0.01678 people per 100,000. On the other hand, saying that 2 people of those 839 died in a road accident simply would give a clearer picture about the true situation. That was all I intended to convey in my post.

[pmarlin]

Total credit for this achievement belongs to the Thai police.

[Reigntax]

I normally dislike those "xx deaths per xx population" statistics, because they are sometimes misleading. You can get a much more accurate picture of the real road carnage if you look at the total population of a country.

For example, Namibia has a population of just 2.1 million. Applying the statistical figure of 45 deaths per 100,000 people to this, we get an overall road toll of 945 people per year.

Thailand, on the other hand, has a population of roughly 65 million, translating into 28,600 road deaths per year.

Iran has 78 million, which considering they have "only" 38 road fatalities per 100,000, calculates as a total of 29,640 road deaths per year.

Suddenly, Namibia doesn't look so bad anymore, does it? But Thailand can certainly shake hands with Iran. They're in the same league.

Eh? So if a country has a population of 10 and 5 get wiped out in an accident, that's better? Maybe you dislike this kind of statistic because you don't understand them.

What are you talking about??? Are you sure YOU understand statistics?

For a country with an assumed population of 10 people (which one?) to have half of its population wiped out in traffic accidents over the course of one year would mean it'd need to have a statistical road fatality rate of either 50,000 people per 100,000 population (if we stick to the deaths/100,000 parameter) or, alternatively, a road death toll of 50 % of the total population per year. Both are ludicrous figures.

The smallest sovereign country on Earth currently is Vatican City with a total population of 839 people (2012 figure). It's actual road fatality rate is 0 people per 100,000.

But even if we assume that 2 persons out of those 839 potentially would fall victim to a traffic accident in the Vatican gardens (perhaps by crashing the Papal vehicle against a tree?), the statistical road toll STILL would be 0 per 100,000 - or if you want to be pedantically accurate, it would actually be 0.01678 people per 100,000. On the other hand, saying that 2 people of those 839 died in a road accident simply would give a clearer picture about the true situation. That was all I intended to convey in my post.

I think someone does not understand statics.

If 2 died per 839 it would be 0.238% of the population or 1 for every 419.5 people.

Therefore at the rate of death per comparison of population would be 0.238% of 100,000 or 238.

2/839 = 0.238% and to confirm 238/100,000x100 = 0.238%.

Who knows where 0.01678 came from?

Edited January 4, 2015 by Reigntax

[el jefe]

The 2013 WHO Report on Road Safety is here: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/

It makes for interesting reading and details exactly how to get fatalities reduced.

74% of Thailand's road fatalities are in/on/driving 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles. Cars and trucks, not so much!

Exactly!

Where would the US, UK, and most of Europe rank if 80% of the vehicles on the road were 2-wheeled or did not have mandatory airbags?

[lee b]

Well how many are killed during the songkran festival alone? Never mind the 362 other days of the year. And this number is based on a typical 3 day songkran.

[kwonitoy]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

I normally dislike those "xx deaths per xx population" statistics, because they are sometimes misleading. You can get a much more accurate picture of the real road carnage if you look at the total population of a country.

For example, Namibia has a population of just 2.1 million. Applying the statistical figure of 45 deaths per 100,000 people to this, we get an overall road toll of 945 people per year.

Thailand, on the other hand, has a population of roughly 65 million, translating into 28,600 road deaths per year.

Iran has 78 million, which considering they have "only" 38 road fatalities per 100,000, calculates as a total of 29,640 road deaths per year.

Suddenly, Namibia doesn't look so bad anymore, does it? But Thailand can certainly shake hands with Iran. They're in the same league.

Eh? So if a country has a population of 10 and 5 get wiped out in an accident, that's better? Maybe you dislike this kind of statistic because you don't understand them.

What are you talking about??? Are you sure YOU understand statistics?

For a country with an assumed population of 10 people (which one?) to have half of its population wiped out in traffic accidents over the course of one year would mean it'd need to have a statistical road fatality rate of either 50,000 people per 100,000 population (if we stick to the deaths/100,000 parameter) or, alternatively, a road death toll of 50 % of the total population per year. Both are ludicrous figures.

The smallest sovereign country on Earth currently is Vatican City with a total population of 839 people (2012 figure). It's actual road fatality rate is 0 people per 100,000.

But even if we assume that 2 persons out of those 839 potentially would fall victim to a traffic accident in the Vatican gardens (perhaps by crashing the Papal vehicle against a tree?), the statistical road toll STILL would be 0 per 100,000 - or if you want to be pedantically accurate, it would actually be 0.01678 people per 100,000. On the other hand, saying that 2 people of those 839 died in a road accident simply would give a clearer picture about the true situation. That was all I intended to convey in my post.

I understand statistics.

If there are two people and one chicken, if I eat the whole chicken and you have nothing, statisticly speaking we have both eaten half a chicken