For example, despite the massive knowledge accrued over the past 100 years regarding OW swims in the English Channel where safety plans and implementations are second-to-none, sometimes it just happens.
www.dover.uk.com/channelswimming
since inception, the risk for soloists seems to be about 1 in 300 crossings (6 per 1700)
in 'modern times', the risk seems to be about the same, 1 in 290 crossings (4 per 1160)
one could argue that the risk is about half of that, or 1 in 600 attempts, because the success rate ballparks somewhere around 50%. a better stat might be risk per "hour in the channel", or risk according to "hour into the swim".
number of crossings:
since 1985: 1160 = 171 + 592 + 255 + 142
2010's: 171 = 77 + 94
2000's: 592 = 92 + 87 + 83 + 64 + 75 + 44 + 52 + 42 + 28 + 25
1990's: 255 = 25 + 23 + 32 + 25 + 27 + 39 + 22 + 28 + 13 + 21
1980's: 241 = 28 + 38 + 36 + 21 + 19 + 18 + 25 + 22 + 19 + 15
Like any extreme sport, Channel swimming has risks attached to it, and over the years seven swimmers have died while attempting the swim.
1926 Rodriguez de Lara
Rodriguez de Lara, from Spain, was believed to have become the first person to drown while making a Channel swim attempt.
1954 Edward J May
On 8 September 1954, lone Englishman Edward J May is reported to have set off from Cap Gris Nez to swim to England, but without a pilot boat and against official advice. His body was found weeks later washed up in Holland.
1984 Kumar Anandan
Sri Lankan swimmer Kumar Anandan, 36, died while making his attempt. At the subsequent inquest, Coroner Richard Sturt recommended that anyone making an attempt to swim the Channel should produce a fitness certificate. Since then all swimmers have been told they must produce a medical certificate.
1988 Renata Agondi
Brazilian swimmer Renata Agondi, 25, from San Paulo, died on 23 August 1988 about eight miles off the French coast while swimming from Dover. There had been a dispute on board the escort ship about who had the final responsibility for ending a swim. As a result, guidelines were drawn up setting down a chain of command, ensuring that the pilot was the person who made the final decision about whether a swimmer should remain in the water.
1999 Fausta Marin Moreno
Mexican swimmer Fausta Marin Moreno drowned during a swim from England to France on 20 August 1999.
2001 Ueli Staub
On 11 August 2001, Swiss swimmer Ueli Staub, 37, disappeared from view when he was about a mile off the French coast having swum for 16 hours from Dover. His body was found six days later, in the sea near Ostende.
2012 Páraic Casey
Páraic Casey, a member of the Sandycove Swimming Club in Cork, Ireland began his swim at 9.13am on Saturday 21 July 2012 and became ill at around 1:30 in the morning of 22 July 2012, just 1km from the coast of France. Attempts to resuscitate him by crew on the boat and medics flown in by a French rescue helicopter were unsuccessful.
A tragic end to Pa'raic Casey's English Channel swim this weekend.I agree, all swimming fatalities are very sad. My prayers go out to Casey’s family.
www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Irishman-dies-whilst-swimming-the-English-Channel.html
Geog, if I may point out a flaw in your analysis… You are basing your statistics on the number of successful crossings. I would suggest that your denominator should be total attempts and not total successful swims. In the early days of channel swimming attempts there was a 2% - 5% success rate. I believe the current success rate is significantly higher than this.
And while every open water casualty and fatality, is a significant event in and of itself, I believe it is important to use valid statistics when reporting on these.
Rob - ... i think you might want to re-read my post because i was already one step ahead of you and addressed your complaints before you even made them.Point taken. My apologies.
I might also note that as late as last year, neither the CSA nor CS&PF had on their websites this data:
www.dover.uk.com/.../fatalities.php
Or if they did have it, I couldn't find it Try cspf.co.uk/.../
Rob - if i understand you correctly, i think you might want to re-read my post because i was already one step ahead of you and addressed your complaints before you even made them.
Geog, if I may point out a flaw in your analysis… You are basing your statistics on the number of successful crossings. I would suggest that your denominator should be total attempts and not total successful swims. In the early days of channel swimming attempts there was a 2% - 5% success rate. I believe the current success rate is significantly higher than this.
And while every open water casualty and fatality, is a significant event in and of itself, I believe it is important to use valid statistics when reporting on these.
I think i covered your 'total attempts' stat with this:
one could argue that the risk is about half of that, or 1 in 600 attempts, because the success rate ballparks somewhere around 50%.
My off the record knowledge is that the current success rate is significantly higher than 50%, but ironically somewhat lower than it was before EC's became 'popular'. Supposedly, the success rate has fallen somewhat in recent years due to an influx of people wanting an EC for bragging rights, or so i've been told in uncertain terms.
Regardless, as a ballpark figure, i maintain 50% is a valid number for all attempts over the past 100 years. Consider Des Renford who had 19 ECs in 19 attempts (who suffered two heart attacks while swimming alone during training swims in Australia. All that, only to die while swimming in a pool with lifeguards present).
For what it is worth, contrary to what you maintained:
a flaw in your analysis … important to use valid statistics
there is no such thing as a flawed analysis or invalid statistic, unless the computation contains errors ... what can be flawed is the interpretation or application. On that note, I went out of my way to present the actual calculations and source of the raw data, and pointedly minimized any interpretation or application.
For someone who is determined to make as many attempts as necessary in order to finally succeed, the 'per crossing' rate (about 1 in 300) is a highly relevant stat, perhaps the most relevant stat given the available data. It is also highly relevant for someone who's personal success rate is high and is working to accrue a large number ECs. Of course both the determined and the accruing swimmers may be outliers among the overall population of swimmers having made an attempts. Or more importantly, the historical 6 may be outliers among the overall population, for example, i would think wearing a wetsuit is quite unusual, be it out of need or out of personal preference.
It's up to the EC community, and more generally the 'long distance' ow community, to be forthcoming with the inconvenient data by publishing data on all attempts (as well as successes), and case-reports on all aborts, long-term injuries, and all incidents, such as being run over by one's escort boat. Those case-reports can be de-personalized to protect the ego's of the swimmers, so i don't buy loneswimmer's justification of witholding that data for reason of privacy. I might also note that as late as last year, neither the CSA nor CS&PF had on their websites this data:
www.dover.uk.com/.../fatalities.php
Or if they did have it, I couldn't find it. The only place it was available as of last year was dover.uk.com/channelswimming. That data is now available on the CS&PF website at the bottom of this page:
cspf.co.uk/.../
and brushed off here:
As the saying goes, "a winner fails many times, a loser fails only once". People fail for a variety of reasons. Sadly some people have lost their lives. People succeed too, but always remember what Capt Webb said: "Nothing great is easy".back on topic to your reply Rob, note that i also suggested two additional stats:
a better stat might be risk per "hour in the channel", or risk according to "hour into the swim".
Try ttp://cspf.co.uk/channel-facts/
didn't i post that link? as in:
I might also note that as late as last year, neither the CSA nor CS&PF had on their websites this data:
www.dover.uk.com/.../fatalities.php
Or if they did have it, I couldn't find it. The only place it was available as of last year was dover.uk.com/channelswimming. That data is now available on the CS&PF website at the bottom of this page:
cspf.co.uk/.../
and brushed off here:
Quote:
As the saying goes, "a winner fails many times, a loser fails only once". People fail for a variety of reasons. Sadly some people have lost their lives. People succeed too, but always remember what Capt Webb said: "Nothing great is easy".
That website, cspf.co.uk, came into existence within the past year (registered 2011-03-14 per whois database). Since the new website was designed and developed by a group of Math PhDs and similar (Riskpoint), I suspect the new cspf president, also a mathematician, had something to do with the new site.
didn't i post that link?
Indeed you did, and for what it's worth your prose and argumentation are quite comprehensible.
Great topic for discussion... I just wish it were posed on that other site where, among others, both the President & Hon. Sec. of the CS&PF could chime in personally.
What happened with Paraic Casey is tragic, but it is still unknown what caused his death. Much more troubling are incidents when a person's life may be potentially at risk because people involved in the swim don't respond to what are clear signs that the swimmer is in severe distress.
In Paraic's case it isn't clear that either the crew or the pilot did something wrong, or that they didn't do everything they should have. However, people should not speculate in the absence of facts.
thanks evmo. without ever having posted on that other forum, i've lurked there quite a bit. great resource by the way, thanks!
Like that site, and like swimclub.co.uk, registration here on the usms forum is cost-free and open to the general public, so anyone who might want to comment on my posts is really free to do so here at their leisure. Loneswimmer, whom i referenced above, follows this forum, or at least used to post here.
My sense of the available data is that an attempt at an EC (or similar ow swim) would far and away be the most risky undertaking that the swimmer would undertake in their entire life.
Everest is more dangerous ....
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../19074222
or
www.bmj.com/.../bmj.a2654
... but not that much more considering the security of modern life.
With their new website, CS&PF has taken a commendable (from my standpoint) step forward by including the historical 7 on their site. I'd like to see more inconvenient data published and think the ow community in general and potential aspirants especially would benefit as well by seeing it early on in their accumulation of EC knowledge.
In a post above, I quoted a paragraph from CS&PF that dismisses the risk. I'd like to see CS&PF replace that paragraph with something akin to a statement by the BMJ paper's lead author Firth, an experienced mountaineer himself:
"The majority of those who have died on Everest were in the prime of their lives, with families and friends left bereft," stresses Firth, who is an instructor in Anaesthesia at Harvard Medical School. "Mountaineering is for fun; it's not worth dying or leaving others there to die. Appropriate caution is the hallmark of the elite mountaineer – the mountain will always be there next year."
source:
www.sciencedaily.com/.../081209221709.htm
Back to your original point evmo .... I agree that a discussion developed around risk could be interesting. For example, is it moral/ethical for a charity to enter into a fundraising partnership with an extremely high-risk endeavor? But without having the inconvenient data published ahead of time, my guess is that a discussion of risk would degrade into a series of opinion statements and political hedging, especially if not started by a highly regarded leader of the OW community. Maybe someone in the executive ranks of the CS&PF will start such a thread on that other site.
For example, is it moral/ethical for a charity to enter into a fundraising partnership with an extremely high-risk endeavor?.
I agree this would be a very interesting discussion. An initial problem would be whether in assessing the risk do you look at just the activity, or the activity and the person's experience, or the activity and person's experience in light of the support team that will be present? A very difficult analysis.
if the risk exceeded the charity's tolerance when assessed by any one of various methods, then for the charity to enter into a fundraising partnership seems, to me, ethically questionable. it'd be interesting to learn how big-name charities assess and constrain fund raising proposals involving high-risk endeavors.
