bunnyjadwiga (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
bunnyjadwiga) wrote2011-01-07 11:12 am
bunnyjadwiga) wrote2011-01-07 11:12 am
How to lie with statistics
Just so you all know: Vital Statistics when dealing with abortion: 2 statistics are often reported in ways that can be easily translated into percentages. One is the number of abortions performed divided by the number of women who are resident in the area-- fairly low: in 2006, 16.1 per 1000 women, i.e. 1.6% percent of the female population of the US between 15-44 had an abortion. That makes a useless statistic for politics, of course.
However, the most common statistics, the abortion ratio is
"number of abortions per 1,000 live births" -- that is, the number of abortions divided by the number of live births, times 1000.
What's wrong with this picture? It's usually reported in the news as "X percent of pregnancies" and the number seems to be the RATIO divided by 1000. Do the math.
Yup. By definition, the total number of *pregnancies* is going to be significantly larger than the number of live births-- it has to include live births, abortions, AND miscarriage. So, for instance, the 2009 abortion ratio for NYC would be 44%, as reported on the news, but when you correctly calculate what percentage of pregnancies in NYC end in abortions, it's 38%. (BTW, the number of miscarriages in NYC is also twice that of any other part of the state...)
In 2006, the CDC numbered 846,181 abortions in the US. I can't find a statistic for total pregnancies from the CDC, only teen pregnancies (and remember, the rate of teen pregnancies has *not* been 'skyrocketing' in recent years: CDC says "The US teen birth rate fell by more than one-third from 1991 through 2005, but then increased by 5 percent over two consecutive years. Data for 2008 and 2009, however, indicate that the long-term downward trend has resumed.")
However, the most common statistics, the abortion ratio is
"number of abortions per 1,000 live births" -- that is, the number of abortions divided by the number of live births, times 1000.
What's wrong with this picture? It's usually reported in the news as "X percent of pregnancies" and the number seems to be the RATIO divided by 1000. Do the math.
Yup. By definition, the total number of *pregnancies* is going to be significantly larger than the number of live births-- it has to include live births, abortions, AND miscarriage. So, for instance, the 2009 abortion ratio for NYC would be 44%, as reported on the news, but when you correctly calculate what percentage of pregnancies in NYC end in abortions, it's 38%. (BTW, the number of miscarriages in NYC is also twice that of any other part of the state...)
In 2006, the CDC numbered 846,181 abortions in the US. I can't find a statistic for total pregnancies from the CDC, only teen pregnancies (and remember, the rate of teen pregnancies has *not* been 'skyrocketing' in recent years: CDC says "The US teen birth rate fell by more than one-third from 1991 through 2005, but then increased by 5 percent over two consecutive years. Data for 2008 and 2009, however, indicate that the long-term downward trend has resumed.")
no subject
This also includes the abortions provided for women who do NOT reside in the area, because of lack of facilities in their geographical area, or for fear of shame. So the numbers can be considered as artificially higher.
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
Re: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
*grin*
Re: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics"
Influenced by before I read the damn story: sadly only stopped most recently :-\
no subject
Number of children in Foster Care placement in NYC alone: 15,052
Number of children that are subject to an open abuse or neglect case investigation: 9.694
Per the NYC child services office home page: http://www.nyc.gov/html/acs/html/home/home.shtml