Why Is Swimming the Most Deadly Leg of a Triathlon? (Page 2)

We lost a fellow triathlete here in Vermont last month during the swim portion. Initially it was reported as a heart condition, but later it was corrected to the cause of death being accidental drowning.

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/burlingtonfreepress/obituary.aspx?n=stephen-jj-mount&pid=152380265&fhid=4950

IIRC most of the deaths have been attributed to either heart attack or heart arrhythmia  - which likely would NOT be caught by a screening EKG.

I DO think that especially with larger triathlons (NY, St Anthony's, Chicago....) some sort of swim screen needs to happen - especially if that is the first triathlon someone is doing.

This is what I did during my OWS as well. I was very calm, but I purposefully stayed out of everyone else's way.

I wonder if some of the larger populated races and Ironmans should have qualifying criteria -- like Kona and Boston have.

My family owns a Funeral Home.  I've seen more people die from sitting on the couch then swimming, biking or running....just sayin

Not to make light of anyone drowning, please don't take it that way

"the inability to rest properly if needed (or call for help) as you could do in the marathon and bike [segments]; and, fifth, the difficulties in being noticed if the swimmer is in trouble due to the number of athletes in a body of water, which is not transparent"

I think this plays a big role.  If someone goes down on the bike or run it's likely that someone would stop and see if the person is OK.  In the swim you don't really see what's going on around you and in a sea of swimmers it's tough for lifeguards see what's going on.

Finding ways to thin out the chaos at the start would be a good place to start but that would likely mean keeping courses open longer and more cost for race directors.  Small 'beginner' waves at the end with fewer people in each wave is a possibility for those new to the swim. 

Swimsafe http://www.triaids.com/How%20to%20Use.htm is something I would consider if doing a huge race with a mass start or a race with a tough swim (ie alcatraz).  Not because I wasn't capable or properly trained but because things can happen in the water to even the most experienced of swimmers.  My biggest fear would be not being noticed in time by a lifeguard or a passing swimmer.  If someone grabbed your arm for help or you ran into a body would you even notice?  Most people train and practice to plow through all the chaos on the swim.

There is 'risk' in everything we do.  I ran a 1/2 marathon last year where 2 people died on an easy course in perfect conditions.  I've also done a 12k where there was a death.  1.5 deaths in 100,000 seems like a pretty low risk factor.  I looked at the NHTSA site and the fatality rate for motor vehicle crashes was 11.1 per 100,000 (includes pedestrian deaths attributed to motor vehicle accidents).  So I guess I'm safer doing a tri than driving my car.

A lot more research needs to be done. I saw the JAMA article and it's basicially a short communication summarizing two year's worth of data. More statistical analysis is needed. Fortunately there is a lot of data available. Water temperature, air temperature and humidity, number of athletes in the water, prior experience, etc.

"Drowning was the declared cause of each swimming death, but 7 of 9 athletes with autopsy had cardiovascular abnormalities identified." Had this occurred on land they likely would have been classified differently. 

There was a letter and a reply to that letter for the JAMA article. They discuss potential underlying causes as well as disclosing additional autopsy details.

An analogy I thought of would be comparing driving to flying. Driving is much more dangerous, but accidents when flying tend to have more fatalities. You can pull over when driving but that option doesn't exist if something goes wrong in the air (generally). Same goes for triathlons and land versus water.

ME ME ME ME ME

This is exactly what I did in my only tri so far.  I started behind everyone and waited thirty seconds after the gun to let the faster people take off.  I made a point to not get too close to other swimmers and always made sure I knew where the kayaks/boats were.  I had no problem finishing the swim, but I know I am not the strongest swimmer and that I had never had experience with a mass start so I didn't want to chance things.  I think people need to be more aware of what their abilities are.  I talked to a couple of other guys who were doing their first triathlon as well.  Neither of them seemed any more prepared for the swim than I was, but they took off right in the thick of things with all of the other people.  Now, maybe they were ex swimmers who had more ability than I did, but it did not seem that way from what they said.  I think people should take an honest assessment of themselves and use that knowledge to protect themselves. 

I've also heard about some tris that require first timers to wear a different color swim cap so that kayakers can look out for them more so.  That seems like a good idea.  Or maybe have a beginner start after everyone else starts.  But then there might be too many people to rescue .

Tom-

Yeah, this is not the best forum to suggest a certification. But, the ones shouting you down I can almost guarantee are NOT the people that grew up swimming.

I also wonder why people chafe so much at the thought of requiring a couple of sprints or an Oly before IM, etc. There are MANY many sports where you toil at the basic level before moving up, and because it's "just the way it is", people accept it. Look at the Category system in cycling.

John

Where is the statistics that say most of the deaths are in longer distance races?

I don't really have an issue with needing to do a shorter race before the longer ones, but I don't know that it addresses this problem. 

One problem with this idea, or requiring a clinic or class, is there is still risk of death in the sprint or the clinic.

I have no problem with individual race directors requiring swim clinics, or prior experience.  But I do not think it should be mandated by the USAT or any other organization.

Unless I am doing something wrong statistically (and I know there's a bunch of other science-types on here who can correct me if I am), here are three telling numbers:

Incidence of MI (heart attack) in general population (age adjusted): ~0.21%, or 208 out of 100,000

Incidence of FATAL MI (heart attack) in general population age 45-64: 7.8%

Incidence of death in triathletes (all ages): 0.0015%, or 1.5 out of 100,000

My conclusion is that the risk of death in a triathlon is very low, media hype notwithstanding. The biggest issue is that as the majority of incidences occur in water they have a high fatality rate. Lots of potential reasons for that.

I am not a statistician BUT.  Aren't we comparing apples and oranges here?

If you say Incidence of MI in population is X% is that per year? Per lifetime?  Certainly not per day.

If you talk about the incidence in triathlons I THINK you are talking per EVENT.  2-17 hour time period.

Those can't really be compared, can they?

(Edited for spelling)

"I have no problem with individual race directors requiring swim clinics, or prior experience.  But I do not think it should be mandated by the USAT or any other organization."

I think your perspective mirrors the majority based on what I've heard and read over the past two or three years at events and on forums.

My question is, why?

Why shouldn't swim safety be mandated to a similar degree that cycling safety is during competitive events? We have a helmet rule on the bike, and drafting rules, and pre-race meetings where a focus is often the bike course and navigation and hazards on it.

When our sport started, bike helmets were not required. When we got a governing body it was one of the very first rules drafted. There was push back then to the helmet rules.

My point is that we- you and I- don't own the sport anymore. We aren't the middle 85%. A new culture is entering the sport and there is anecdotal suggestion this new demographic may not be entirely competent in an open water setting- they may lack basic survival skills. They may have a pre-existing medical condition that places them at risk. That may contribute to greater risk and/or poor risk management.

Personally- individually, I don't like legislating common sense. I don't like more rules and more hoops to jump through. I suspect most of us, the 15% of the sport that actively participate in triathlon forums, don't either.

But what about the other 85%? Does the sport have a responsibility to somehow "safeguard" them?

This isn't a question of individual preference, it is a question of the collective health of the sport.