[Paddlewise] Numbers Crunching

>>I  just finished reading the 32 page ACA study "CRITICAL JUDGMENT: 

>>THIS REPORT DOES NOT 
>>SEPERATE KAYAK DEATH BY WHITEWATER OR FLATWATER.  

>>50% of fatal kayak accidents occurred while wearing a PFD, 44% while not 
>>wearing a PFD (no explanation for the other 6%). 

 
   When I first read this I thought, like you, that the numbers were probably 
skewed by the whitewater fatalities. I would sure like to see a study done of 
only sea kayaking related incidents. Unfortunately I do not know of any data 
base available for such a study --- or maybe I do! It occurred to me that I 
do have a collection of data, of sorts, in all of my back issues of "Sea 
Kayaker Magazine." Since the beginning SK has been putting out a safety 
column in which it regularly reports on sea kayaking mishaps. So on a whim I 
got out my back issues and went to work.
   While I have every issue of "Sea Kayaker Magazine," I'm afraid that my 
filing system leaves something to be desired, so I was unable to find seven 
issues. They are around someplace and will show up eventually, but in the 
meantime that leaves 87 issues for my "study." In those 87 issues I found 21 
stories of kayaking fatalities. Of those 21 stories there were 5 fatalities 
of which it could not be determined from the article whether or not the 
victims were wearing pfd's. What I found among the remaining 20 fatalities 
really surprised me.
   There were 2 people who died, one in a floater suit, and another in a 
survival suit which is rated by the Coast Guard as a flotation device, 
without pfd's. While I personally would include these in the "with pfd" 
category, I recognize that someone could argue that technically they were not 
wearing a pfd, so I put them in a category by themselves labeled "other." Now 
the surprising part --- 8 people died without a pfd and 10 died while wearing 
one! If you crunch the numbers then you find that according to my SK survey, 
50% died with the pfd, 40% died without and 10% are in the "other" category.
   So the question is, does my little SK survey accurately reflect what is 
happening in the world of sea kayaking? Probably not. But then again, my 
percentages are startlingly close to the ACA's findings of 50%, 44% and 6%! 
In both the ACA report and my own SK survey, which I would like to remind you 
deals only with sea kayaking related incidents, the percentage of people 
dying with their pfd on is higher then that of those who died without it! Why 
is that?
   While Steve may wax poetic about all of the people who are alive today as 
a result of being saved by their pfd's in a near miss, I would have to 
believe that if this was in fact the case then the numbers here would lean 
much more significantly towards the pfd's then they do. I find myself 
wondering if any, and how many, of the fatalities might have in fact occurred 
as the result of a swimmer being unable to reach shore, or even their own 
boat, as a result of their swimming efforts being impeded by the bulk of 
their own pfd. Or perhaps they chose not to attempt to make the swim to shore 
when that would have been the better option, having been seduced into 
believing that they were going to be OK since they were wearing their pfd. 
But of course neither my scenario's or Steve's are really worth any real 
consideration since they are both little more then groundless speculation.
   In putting together my SK survey I decided to concentrate only on the 
fatalities as I believe the near misses leave too many variables to be 
accounted for. For example, in Volume 2 Number 3 winter 1985 issue is a story 
of a husband and wife that capsized in a double. He was wearing a pfd and 
survived, while she was not wearing a pfd and died. While it would be easy to 
use this incident as proof of the effectiveness of pfd's, the details of the 
accident, I feel, seem to indicate that the woman may have succumb to sudden 
drowning syndrome, and could have ended up dead with or without a pfd on. 
There is no way we can know for sure. In another incident, Volume 6 Number 3 
winter 1989/1990, two brothers capsized in a double. The first brother was 
believed to have removed his pfd after the capsize in order to better swim to 
shore - he didn't make it. Again, it would be very easy to suggest that he 
may have fared much better had he kept his pfd on. Of course it must be noted 
that the second brother was found dead as well --- wearing his pfd.
   So just what does this all mean? I really don't know. But I think it's all 
very interesting. I must point out, however, that it would seem that both the 
ACA report and my SK survey seem to support, at least on the surface, what I 
have been saying all along. That is, in my opinion, the effectiveness of 
pfd's in your typical sea kayaking scenario is greatly over rated.

Scott
So.Cal.

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************