4 ms·

Sky diving is dangerous, but not that dangerous. A single jump is less dangerous than bunion removal surgery. (0.004% chance of death for skydiving and 0.01% fo

by foxyv 3y ago

Sky diving is dangerous, but not that dangerous. A single jump is less dangerous than bunion removal surgery. (0.004% chance of death for skydiving and 0.01% for bunion removal) This puts the LD50 of parachute jumps around 1,700 jumps. (Not exactly something I would do for a job but would try once without worrying too much.) However, there is definitely the possibility of death from jumping out of an airplane and I don't think any reasonable person would think there isn't. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9859333/#:~:text=With%20modern%20equipment%20and%20training,high%2Drisk%20sport%20into%20perspective https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9859333/#:~:tex.... https://edinburghorthopaedics.org/media/cfikoe2l/bunion-correction-surgery-v2-0.pdf https://edinburghorthopaedics.org/media/cfikoe2l/bunion-corr...

tonybourke 3y ago
This is a bit of looking at the statistics the wrong way. I'm a skydiving instructor, btw, with about 2,000 jumps. Skydiving is remarkably safe considering all the factors involved. That's primarily for two reasons: The gear and the training * Like anything in aviation, the gear has iterated over the years to be very safe. Skydiving in the early days was less safe. We have better gear now that has made it much safer. Same for aviation: Airplanes have a lot of safety features that they didn't have decades ago, and fatalities and incidents in general are extremely rare. * Training has come a long way as well, with a more standardized curriculum and like the gear, iterations over the decade to address weak points. Procedures have been developed so when faced with a situation, we can react instead of analyze. Problem solving in the sky is not a good option. So the likely things that could happen, we have procedures for that we memorize. They're simple for solo skydivers, and a bit more complicated for a tandem instructor. With well maintained gear and proper currency on procedures, skydiving is very safe. The most common issues are sprained ankles or broken wrists from band landings. So what causes the deaths? Like the rest of aviation, we are the biggest risk factors: Human error. One of the leading reasons why skydivers are killed is a sport called "swooping", which is spinning a parachute to build speed and planning out right above the ground. It's a sport with very little margin for error. 10 feet can meant the difference of dragging your toe across the water for an epic video clip or a broken femur (or worse). In skydiving, femur is a verb. "I heard so-and-so femured". Do a Google search on it and you can see both why swooping is appealing the practitioners and also dangerous as fuck. A tandem jump doesn't involve swooping. So by virtue of being a tandem passenger, the leading cause of death of skydivers is eliminated. Lumping all skydives together from a risk perspective doesn't make much sense, given the wide variety of risks associated with various types of skydiving. Tandem skydives, while not risk free, are among the least risky skydives done. The death of the 18 year old tandem passenger at Lodi was essentially human error. The tandem instructor had a malfunction (the drogue didn't inflate) and didn't react according to the training developed. There was a whole controversy about how the instructor examiner didn't train the new instructors correctly and just signed them off anyway. The death was sadly mostly a failure of training and procedures. The gear malfunctioned, as all gear can, but the proper procedures likely would've resulted in a mildly interesting story told over beers instead of a tragedy.
- foxyv 3y ago
  You are more than likely, completely correct. These types of jumps are probably so safe that you are in more danger riding in a car to the jump than taking the jump itself. If better data collection was mandated, similar to GA pilot logbooks, we would be able to back up your personal knowledge with hard figures. However, we are stuck using general epidemiological data. You are definitely right about swooping though. https://parachutist.com/Article/rating-corner-why-are-tandem-instructors-still-making-low-turns https://parachutist.com/Article/rating-corner-why-are-tandem...
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  This doesn't surprise me at all--for most activities the majority of the risk is in the tail.
SirMaster 3y ago
But is that sky diving number for just general skydiving, or a tandem dive with a completely new to the sport customer like anyone here would actually care about. Like one, I assume tandem has a higher incident rate, and also that first time divers has a higher rate as well.
- lupusreal 3y ago
  The skydiving accident rate also includes very experienced divers who do exceedingly reckless things, like wingsuiting next to mountains.
  - foxyv 3y ago
    You may be right, I do know that there are very few total skydiving deaths per year so high risk activities could inflate the figures fairly easily. However, I don't think wing suiting is counted in the statistics.
    - porkbeer 3y ago
      It is if they exited a plane to do so.
  - imzadi 3y ago
    I mean, based on the observations in the article, there's really no way to know the accident rate with any certainty. No one is even keeping track. It's all reliant on self-reporting to a lobbying organization that most these places aren't even a part of.
  - todfox 3y ago
    It does not because it only counts as a skydive if you exit an aircraft. If you're jumping off of land, it's BASE.
    - avar 3y ago
      People deploy from aircraft and proceed to fly close to terrain with wingsuits. [1] is one example. 1. https://youtu.be/kooYQ0IOnoM?si=xCpGxbSmivlNY3e- https://youtu.be/kooYQ0IOnoM?si=xCpGxbSmivlNY3e-
bombcar 3y ago
I suspect that like many of these kinds of things, if you eliminate the "worst players" you get something significantly safer. Like this jump location, for example.
- datascienced 3y ago
  Worst players aren’t in the stats as they don’t report at all.
margalabargala 3y ago
> This puts the LD50 of parachute jumps around 1,700 jumps. This suffers from the same issue as saying "200 years ago the life expectancy was 35". Most of the people who die skydiving are inexperienced, reckless, or both. They are not the sort of people who are likely to make it to 1700 jumps. If you say "among people who have survived 1700 skydives, how many died skydiving before reaching 3400?" I bet you will find it to be even safer.
- foxyv 3y ago
  It's more of a rhetorical LD50. Otherwise Don Kellner would be dead as a doornail long before reaching his record. https://www.uspa.org/about-uspa/uspa-news/uspa-posthumously-awards-don-kellner-his-final-most-jumps-record https://www.uspa.org/about-uspa/uspa-news/uspa-posthumously-... Edit: If the statistics held the same for him, at 46,000 jumps he had a 99% chance of dying from a failure.
- eek2121 3y ago
  The same could apply to economics. I feel like US stats still haven't caught up to actual numbers. For example, the number of six figure jobs. A big problem is that when numbers change quickly, median numbers, or even average numbers, don't immediately capture that change. It can take YEARS for the real stats to come out. That being said, it is absolutely ridiculous that this has become the drama it has. Federal departments should be given lawyers and be allowed to go after people.
- Stibinator 3y ago
  In rock climbing there's some evidence that there is a U-shaped risk curve. Newbs who do dumb stuff on one end and experienced climbers who get complacent on the other.
  - foxyv 3y ago
    That holds the same for airplane pilots as well. I love this lecture by Mike Patey: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1nXjPhGrwY&t=2943s&pp=ygUZbWlrZSBwYXRleSBzYWZldHkgbGVjdHVyZQ%3D%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1nXjPhGrwY&t=2943s&pp=ygUZb...
jefftk 3y ago
> 0.01% for bunion removal That sounds implausibly high to me? When I click through I see: There are general risks of surgery: wound infection 7%, bone infection 1%, painful scar (5%), blood clot in the leg or lung 1%, Complex regional Pain Syndrome(lasting debilitating pain) 1%, bone healing problems 1%, amputation 0.01%, death 0.01%. Amputation and death are really both 0.01%?
- foxyv 3y ago
  Surgery has gotten a lot safer in the last couple decades however, there are still risks. General anesthesia used to be ten times more dangerous than it is now but it's still not zero.
  - jefftk 3y ago
    Why would you use general anesthesia for bunion removal? Wouldn't local be fine?
    - foxyv 3y ago
      I do not know. But they do according the source I linked.
    - pugworthy 3y ago
      You might want to read up on what it is. It’s not like scraping a callus off the side of your foot. Even mild may involve removal of bone and realignment of muscles, tendons, and ligaments surrounding the joint. Source: https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-therapies/bunion-surgery https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-t...
      - jefftk 3y ago
        Your link has: "Most bunion surgery is performed under ankle block anesthesia, in which your foot is numb, but you are awake. Occasionally, general or spinal anesthesia is used."
- 3y ago

by foxyv 3y ago

tonybourke 3y ago

This is a bit of looking at the statistics the wrong way. I'm a skydiving instructor, btw, with about 2,000 jumps. Skydiving is remarkably safe considering all the factors involved. That's primarily for two reasons: The gear and the training * Like anything in aviation, the gear has iterated over the years to be very safe. Skydiving in the early days was less safe. We have better gear now that has made it much safer. Same for aviation: Airplanes have a lot of safety features that they didn't have decades ago, and fatalities and incidents in general are extremely rare. * Training has come a long way as well, with a more standardized curriculum and like the gear, iterations over the decade to address weak points. Procedures have been developed so when faced with a situation, we can react instead of analyze. Problem solving in the sky is not a good option. So the likely things that could happen, we have procedures for that we memorize. They're simple for solo skydivers, and a bit more complicated for a tandem instructor. With well maintained gear and proper currency on procedures, skydiving is very safe. The most common issues are sprained ankles or broken wrists from band landings. So what causes the deaths? Like the rest of aviation, we are the biggest risk factors: Human error. One of the leading reasons why skydivers are killed is a sport called "swooping", which is spinning a parachute to build speed and planning out right above the ground. It's a sport with very little margin for error. 10 feet can meant the difference of dragging your toe across the water for an epic video clip or a broken femur (or worse). In skydiving, femur is a verb. "I heard so-and-so femured". Do a Google search on it and you can see both why swooping is appealing the practitioners and also dangerous as fuck. A tandem jump doesn't involve swooping. So by virtue of being a tandem passenger, the leading cause of death of skydivers is eliminated. Lumping all skydives together from a risk perspective doesn't make much sense, given the wide variety of risks associated with various types of skydiving. Tandem skydives, while not risk free, are among the least risky skydives done. The death of the 18 year old tandem passenger at Lodi was essentially human error. The tandem instructor had a malfunction (the drogue didn't inflate) and didn't react according to the training developed. There was a whole controversy about how the instructor examiner didn't train the new instructors correctly and just signed them off anyway. The death was sadly mostly a failure of training and procedures. The gear malfunctioned, as all gear can, but the proper procedures likely would've resulted in a mildly interesting story told over beers instead of a tragedy.

foxyv 3y ago
You are more than likely, completely correct. These types of jumps are probably so safe that you are in more danger riding in a car to the jump than taking the jump itself. If better data collection was mandated, similar to GA pilot logbooks, we would be able to back up your personal knowledge with hard figures. However, we are stuck using general epidemiological data. You are definitely right about swooping though. https://parachutist.com/Article/rating-corner-why-are-tandem-instructors-still-making-low-turns https://parachutist.com/Article/rating-corner-why-are-tandem...
LorenPechtel 3y ago
This doesn't surprise me at all--for most activities the majority of the risk is in the tail.

SirMaster 3y ago

But is that sky diving number for just general skydiving, or a tandem dive with a completely new to the sport customer like anyone here would actually care about. Like one, I assume tandem has a higher incident rate, and also that first time divers has a higher rate as well.

lupusreal 3y ago
The skydiving accident rate also includes very experienced divers who do exceedingly reckless things, like wingsuiting next to mountains.
- foxyv 3y ago
  You may be right, I do know that there are very few total skydiving deaths per year so high risk activities could inflate the figures fairly easily. However, I don't think wing suiting is counted in the statistics.
  - porkbeer 3y ago
    It is if they exited a plane to do so.
- imzadi 3y ago
  I mean, based on the observations in the article, there's really no way to know the accident rate with any certainty. No one is even keeping track. It's all reliant on self-reporting to a lobbying organization that most these places aren't even a part of.
- todfox 3y ago
  It does not because it only counts as a skydive if you exit an aircraft. If you're jumping off of land, it's BASE.
  - avar 3y ago
    People deploy from aircraft and proceed to fly close to terrain with wingsuits. [1] is one example. 1. https://youtu.be/kooYQ0IOnoM?si=xCpGxbSmivlNY3e- https://youtu.be/kooYQ0IOnoM?si=xCpGxbSmivlNY3e-

bombcar 3y ago

I suspect that like many of these kinds of things, if you eliminate the "worst players" you get something significantly safer. Like this jump location, for example.

datascienced 3y ago
Worst players aren’t in the stats as they don’t report at all.

margalabargala 3y ago

> This puts the LD50 of parachute jumps around 1,700 jumps. This suffers from the same issue as saying "200 years ago the life expectancy was 35". Most of the people who die skydiving are inexperienced, reckless, or both. They are not the sort of people who are likely to make it to 1700 jumps. If you say "among people who have survived 1700 skydives, how many died skydiving before reaching 3400?" I bet you will find it to be even safer.

foxyv 3y ago
It's more of a rhetorical LD50. Otherwise Don Kellner would be dead as a doornail long before reaching his record. https://www.uspa.org/about-uspa/uspa-news/uspa-posthumously-awards-don-kellner-his-final-most-jumps-record https://www.uspa.org/about-uspa/uspa-news/uspa-posthumously-... Edit: If the statistics held the same for him, at 46,000 jumps he had a 99% chance of dying from a failure.
eek2121 3y ago
The same could apply to economics. I feel like US stats still haven't caught up to actual numbers. For example, the number of six figure jobs. A big problem is that when numbers change quickly, median numbers, or even average numbers, don't immediately capture that change. It can take YEARS for the real stats to come out. That being said, it is absolutely ridiculous that this has become the drama it has. Federal departments should be given lawyers and be allowed to go after people.
Stibinator 3y ago
In rock climbing there's some evidence that there is a U-shaped risk curve. Newbs who do dumb stuff on one end and experienced climbers who get complacent on the other.
- foxyv 3y ago
  That holds the same for airplane pilots as well. I love this lecture by Mike Patey: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1nXjPhGrwY&t=2943s&pp=ygUZbWlrZSBwYXRleSBzYWZldHkgbGVjdHVyZQ%3D%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1nXjPhGrwY&t=2943s&pp=ygUZb...

jefftk 3y ago

> 0.01% for bunion removal That sounds implausibly high to me? When I click through I see: There are general risks of surgery: wound infection 7%, bone infection 1%, painful scar (5%), blood clot in the leg or lung 1%, Complex regional Pain Syndrome(lasting debilitating pain) 1%, bone healing problems 1%, amputation 0.01%, death 0.01%. Amputation and death are really both 0.01%?

foxyv 3y ago
Surgery has gotten a lot safer in the last couple decades however, there are still risks. General anesthesia used to be ten times more dangerous than it is now but it's still not zero.
- jefftk 3y ago
  Why would you use general anesthesia for bunion removal? Wouldn't local be fine?
  - foxyv 3y ago
    I do not know. But they do according the source I linked.
  - pugworthy 3y ago
    You might want to read up on what it is. It’s not like scraping a callus off the side of your foot. Even mild may involve removal of bone and realignment of muscles, tendons, and ligaments surrounding the joint. Source: https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-therapies/bunion-surgery https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/treatment-tests-and-t...
    - jefftk 3y ago
      Your link has: "Most bunion surgery is performed under ankle block anesthesia, in which your foot is numb, but you are awake. Occasionally, general or spinal anesthesia is used."
3y ago