Dangers of giving birth

blueboy43

amcluesent wrote: »

>the risk of death from certain activities, measured in micromorts.<

I was amazed to hear that a squaddie on a tour in Afghanistan had the same risk of death as a motorcyclist going on a 200 mile ride in the UK. IIRC that was on the BBC's 'More or Less' programme. I guess you just never hear on the main news that a biker's family 'have been informed' he's had a tank slapper.

Not sure if you mis-heard but it is 1 day in Afghanistan for a soldier is equivalent to 200 miles on a motorcycle.

not quite the same thing.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

zappahey wrote: »

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/generalisation

Risk factorsMost maternal mortality occurs in developing world with >500,000/year.4,5 Risk factors for maternal deaths in the UK include:2

• Social disadvantage:
  Women living in families where both partners were unemployed, where social exclusion was an associated problem, were up to 20 times more likely to die than women from the more advantaged groups. In addition, single mothers were three times more likely to die than those in stable relationships.
• Poor communities:
  Women living in the most deprived areas had a 45% higher death rate than women living in the most affluent areas.
• Minority ethnic groups:
  Women from ethnic groups were, on average, three times more likely to die than caucasian women. Black African women, including asylum seekers and newly arrived refugees had a mortality rate seven times higher than caucasian women. These groups were shown to have had major problems in obtaining obstetric care. This disparity in mortality rates between ethnic groups has been noted in other affluent societies.6

Not really something to generalise about really. Twice as high in the USA & nealry 50% higher in parts of the UK & 20 times more likely depending on who you are.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

Baby boys 10x more likely to die than girls - really?

There are more old women than old men yet more boys than girls are born each year in the UK. The males must be dying at some point and the first year is the riskiest until you get very old so it's as good a time as any for then to die (hope that doesn't sound too callous).

nicko33

michaels wrote: »

Baby boys 10x more likely to die than girls - really?

without knowing the actual probabilities it's hard to say, but if the probabilities are small then it's entirely likely.

It does not mean 1 boy survives for every 10 girls that survive.

If it's 1 in million girls die and 10 in a million boys die,
then for every 2 million births we end up with 999,999 girls and 999990 boys (assuming for moment a 50/50 gender split in births)


This is the main problem with the media's reporting of risk.
e.g. eating fatty food makes you 10x more likely to get bowel cancer
but if it takes you from 1 in a billion to 10 in a billion, pfft so what?

You only get to hear 10x more likely, not the actual likelihood.

Generali

nicko33 wrote: »

without knowing the actual probabilities it's hard to say, but if the probabilities are small then it's entirely likely.

It does not mean 1 boy survives for every 10 girls that survive.

If it's 1 in million girls die and 10 in a million boys die,
then for every 2 million births we end up with 999,999 girls and 999990 boys (assuming for moment a 50/50 gender split in births)


This is the main problem with the media's reporting of risk.
e.g. eating fatty food makes you 10x more likely to get bowel cancer
but if it takes you from 1 in a billion to 10 in a billion, pfft so what?

You only get to hear 10x more likely, not the actual likelihood.

The measurement of risk is interesting (to me at least).

Someone commuting to work on a bicycle is much more likely to die on his way to work than someone driving a car. So the car driver probably has the greater life expectancy right?

Wrong! The health benefits (AIUI) from regular exercise outweigh the risk of being hit by a truck.

When the newspapers in the early 1980s started reporting a spate of 'muggings' by black youths, crimes that previously would have been marked down by the police as pick pockets were now muggings. Muggings went up (esp if the criminal was black) and pick pocketing went down. The level of the 2 crimes overall remained about the same.

A mid-week question for you to ponder. Where is the most dangerous place in the world for you to be?

nicko33

Generali wrote: »

A mid-week question for you to ponder. Where is the most dangerous place in the world for you to be?

Define dangerous, and in what sort of context.

Being in the middle of an erupting volcano would be quite dangerous, or lying with your head on a railway track. But do you mean something like the most dangerous city to walk about in at night, or something?

Being on death row in the US isn't very dangerous, as you can get an extended life expectancy from the length of the appeals procedure.

zappahey

Generali wrote: »

A mid-week question for you to ponder. Where is the most dangerous place in the world for you to be?

I would hazard a guess at "in your own home"

Jonbvn

Generali wrote: »

A mid-week question for you to ponder. Where is the most dangerous place in the world for you to be?

I'd guess the kitchen or on a farm.

Generali

zappahey wrote: »

I would hazard a guess at "in your own home"

We have a winner!

michaels

Taking approx numbers for illustration

Say there are about 1 million births pa in the uk 50:50 boys and girls, of the 500k boys 77 will die whereas only 6.5 of the girls will. Perhaps health service resources should be biased towards the boys?