How Likely Are You to Die…Today? [Video]

Riding a bike is more dangerous than driving a car; hang gliding is riskier than scuba diving

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Every day we engage in behaviors that raise or lower our long-term chances for survival. Smoke cigarettes and you increase your risk of dying prematurely. Exercise and eat vegetables and you are likely to add precious time to your existence. But just how bad or good are those and other activities, such as drinking alcohol? David Spiegelhalter, a professor of risk assessment at the University of Cambridge, has converted reams of statistical tables into a simple metric: a microlife—30 minutes. If you smoke two cigarettes, you lose 30 minutes of your life. If you exercise for 20 minutes you gain an hour. The risks are explained in our January 2013 Graphic Science column.

Spiegelhalter has devised a similar unit for assessing your chances of immediate death from activities such as driving a car or motorcycle, skydiving, or simply taking a walk: a micromort—a one-in-a-million chance of mortality. He explains micromorts and microlives, and gives the risks involved with all sorts of pursuits, in the video below.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American