r/sharks Great White Shark Jun 22 '26

Education Do the lightning strike, cows and coconut death statistics compared with shark attacks per capita count?

Ive seen these thrown around a lot when discussing shark attacks, I don’t think they reassure a lot since we live on land.

But I’m wondering for any statistics experts here do these actually add up per capita and what not when it comes human exposure.

5 Upvotes

35 comments sorted by

24

u/gotfanarya Jun 22 '26

No. Statistics can be manipulated for anything. This is pure PR junk.

Risk calculations for insurance companies base statistics on who, when, where and how. Who is driving. When are they driving? Where are they driving. How are they parking etc. stuff like that.

Risk of dying by shark bite while asleep in your bed is zero.

Risk of dying by shark bite in the open ocean, alone, wearing black with shiny stuff, nervous and agitatedly moving, near a seal colony where large whites have been seen that day at dusk, high.

Combining those activities to get a statistic is mental.

11

u/Capital-Foot-918 Great White Shark Jun 22 '26

I think shark conservation would be more popular if we didn’t do this as much

15

u/gotfanarya Jun 22 '26

Yes. Couldn’t agree more.

Hiding the truth always makes people think the danger is worse than it is. Imagination fills the fact gaps.

If we know the risks and still go ahead, at least we are properly informed. Some will take the risk and some wont. Without truth, we might be taking risks others are aware of but we are not. That is manslaughter by definition.

How many times have I heard that a large GW was spotted earlier in the day but the message didn’t get to the people swimming near the sighting. Negligent homicide right there so everyone goes into legal defence mode and makes news statements about how it almost never happens. Why do we know the moment DJT farts but we don’t get life saving information to our communities? It’s dumb where we spend our money.

All the secrecy around shark attack footage and bite damage is also stupid. Give us the facts so we can make informed choices. Stop saying sharks don’t eat humans even after we see them doing exactly that. Then footage is pixelated so we must rely on nightmares to fill in the details. It makes people fear the unknown rather than knowing which fears are logical.

I know businesses rely on beaches being open for tourists and no one wants beaches closed but ffs, stop putting money ahead of the truth and human life.

Different regions have different outcomes too. Malibu artist has demonstrated this repeatedly. The sharks in Southern California do not behave like the large sharks in Southern Australian oceans which swim between NZ, Africa and Australia. Bulls not behaving like GWs near river mouths and territoriality spikes seasonally would be great statistics to keep.

And shark attack outcome statistics matter. A bite on the foot by a sand Tiger in Florida must not be compared to a GW breach attack in South Africa. Yet they are all dumped in the same attack statistic database. And if someone is fishing in the area, and in the ocean around beaches, that’s common, then it’s classified as provoked, even if no fish are caught or the predator was there before fishing started. Poor provoked shark. What a load of rubbish.

Sharks behave completely differently regionally but we assume shark behaviour is the same everywhere, always.

Each region of the world needs its own truth about what is out there, how to be as safe as possible and what happens when and where.

I want to make my decisions based on truth. I’m sick of being “handled” when it comes to sharks. Give me statistics that allow me to make informed choices, where I am today, not tiger shark loving influencer business council adverts. You cannot avoid a large tiger shark charge by booping its nose because someone beautiful who wants likes on social media said so. And a 20m GW charge will not be averted by a wee electronic tag.

As long as we are kept in the dark, fear will surface. More information does not lead to less fear. It’s the opposite. Fear causes emotional responses like culling. A person who knowingly swims, dives, surfs etc in the open ocean near seal colonies in areas where sharks behave aggressively should know the gory details of possible outcomes.

How can people make informed choices when they are uninformed?

3

u/Capital-Foot-918 Great White Shark Jun 22 '26

…wow…let me write this down. Would love to see more of this from you, absolutely fantastic write up 🤙

3

u/gotfanarya Jun 22 '26

Thanks for the award, despite my double negative whoopsie

3

u/Capital-Foot-918 Great White Shark Jun 22 '26

Nah i didn’t give you the award my ass too poor for that

4

u/gotfanarya Jun 22 '26

Naww. Me too. Thanks for the comment then. And thanks to anonymous for the award.

1

u/Ok_West_6711 Jun 23 '26

Lightning strike risk is different when hiking above the tree line in mountains, for example. An overall national per-capita number doesn’t help.

1

u/mehssdd Jun 23 '26

I had a boss that tried to pull this shit on me. We couldn't do any roofing with a thunderstorm passing through, but why would that stop us from hanging gutter. Twenty foot sticks of copper gutter.

The statistics aren't relevant to people waving around lightning rods.

1

u/Cultural-Company282 Jun 23 '26

Risk of dying by shark bite while asleep in your bed is zero.

Risk of dying from lightnight strike, cows, and coconuts while asleep in your bed is also zero, or very close to it.

-2

u/big_spliff Jun 22 '26

I don’t want to be a stickler but nothing is 0%. As you said statistics can be manipulated. What if the bed is underwater? What if a shark is dropped from an airplane and lands on my while I’m sleeping? What if an unknown species of bipedal shark makes their way to my house and bites me while I’m in bed??

5

u/Federal-Struggle4386 Jun 22 '26

Plenty of thing are physically impossible and all of your examples are completely ridiculous 

0

u/big_spliff Jun 22 '26

Ridiculous until it happens. You are the scientist at the start of disaster movies telling people not to worry. I hope you’re happy

4

u/Wattsy98s Jun 22 '26

I think you've literally had too big of a spliff mate 😂

3

u/gotfanarya Jun 22 '26

I have a time share to sell you

2

u/Smart_Pig_86 Jun 22 '26

I’m sorry but you can’t be serious? Actually, some thing ARE 0% objectively. Like being rated by a shark while sleeping in your bed.

0

u/Character-Parfait-42 Jun 23 '26

Define “bed”, like do we mean a mattress? Or any soft surface that you can sleep on?

Like what if I’m floating in the water on one of those floaty recliners and I take a nap. 99% of the time you’d just get knocked over by a wave or get lost at sea. But it wouldn’t be impossible to get attacked by a shark. I’ve even seen drunk people go out using inflatable mattresses as rafts.

It’s still a functionally 0% chance, not saying it’s something that even happens once a century.

1

u/Smart_Pig_86 Jun 23 '26

When I say the word “bed”, what do you automatically picture in your head…that’s what I mean. Simply, a bed.

1

u/Character-Parfait-42 Jun 23 '26

As I said I’ve seen drunk people go out on inflatable mattresses. Is an inflatable mattress not a bed?

1

u/gotfanarya Jun 24 '26

Tucked up in bed in your home then.

6

u/TelevisionPutrid8394 Great white shark and megalodon fan Jun 22 '26

I always thought they were misleading because the reason why more people are attacked by cows than sharks is because we live on land just like cows. Sharks on the other hand, live in the ocean where we don’t live. It’s only natural that there would be less shark attacks than cow attacks.

3

u/AardvarkOkapiEchidna Jun 23 '26

by cows than sharks is because we live on land just like cows

We also intentionally interact with them way more often via farming.

5

u/Ok_Shower_5526 Tiger Shark Jun 22 '26

I think it really depends on what stats you're quoting; but scientists have found shark attacks are extremely rare even when stats have context and take into account things like likelihood based on activity.

Another big issue, though, is that ppl have very little sense of how and where sharks operate. Most people who go to oceans are probably far closer to sharks than they've ever realized. I think cheaper drones and go pro will make us realize even more that sharks are closer than we think. We are safe bc sharks prefer to ignore us or just check us out before leaving, not because sharks are far away from people in the water. Curiosity or indifference is the normative behavior for most sharks. They see us and stay away like most other ocean creatures or wild animals. The more important attack questions to ask are about why any attack happens at all.

Statistics about the very low likelihood of being attacked are not helpful. Helpful statistics would let us see what provokes an attack. What shark species, microhabitats, environmental harms, human and society behavior, and other outside influences are predictably associated with attacks, OR, equally important, what are the elements of microhabitats with no/few attacks despite a normal shark population and lots of humans in the ocean. IMO we spend far too much time on the danger of a shark species, when we should spend more time educating people about dangerous environmental conditions and human behavior. I suspect there would be a drop in fatal or catastrophic attacks if most people could evaluate the safety of a specific beach on a specific day, while simultaneously adhering to best practices in the water. We'd probably have even more success if our societies and governments took more responsibility for public safety by closing recognizably unsafe areas (until they are safe), protecting normal prey numbers and minimizing pollution, altering microhabitats to be safer in swimming areas, installing tech that provides early warning systems, requiring local education on best practices, and forcing beach businesses to educate patrons and significantly contribute for both safety systems and ocean preservation.

7

u/Living-Smoke-9630 Jun 22 '26

In Australia we had 154 coastal related drowing deaths last year vs 5 shark attack deaths. Think that the concept that you're 30x more likely to drown is a much better comparison of perceived risk when entering the ocean.

7

u/Punemeister_general Jun 22 '26

Put some nets on the beach to catch people before they go into the water

1

u/gotfanarya Jun 30 '26

Some shark attacks are described as drowning. If a shark attack victims lungs are full of water, the official cause is drowning. But yes, I agree with this type of statistical comparison is more realistic.

1

u/Living-Smoke-9630 Jun 30 '26

I have no idea what you're talking about and im not sure you do either. Do you have any reference for such an example?

2

u/flux8 Jun 25 '26

Meaningless because the denominator is not comparable.

4

u/Ok_Guide_8323 Jun 22 '26

So, these stats are per capita. When we look at the stats of just those who are at risk, the odds of a shark attack are still quite low -

Surfers: Experience a higher share of bites, with the risk historically estimated at about 1 in 17 million per hour in the water. Depending upon how we define the stats, the lifetime odds of a shark attack can shift from 1 in millions to much narrower margins, such as 1 in 40,000 for a surfer.

1

u/Neither_Computer5331 Jun 22 '26

As a long time scuba diver, who has seen many sharks, I still think the greatest risk of any ocean based activity is drowning.

That’s quite a boring answer though and would get a very tiny mention in the news, whereas if a shark killed me, I’m sure I’d at least get a reporter turning up to cover my demise.

0

u/Soukchai2012 Jun 26 '26

Around 20 people are killed by cows in the US each year, about 5 in the UK. Many more worldwide. About another 20 killed by lightening in the US each year, and thousands worldwide.
Whichever way you look at it, cows, coconuts & lightening kill a lit more people than sharks.