Polio [1] and guinea worm! If you're looking for something to be thankful for today, I've found you something in today's threads. More examples welcomed!
In my lifetime there’s been a significant reduction (over 20%) in the rate of cancer deaths each year, car accident fatalities, and CO2 production in the US which has mostly been through better technology and therefore able to spread.
Globally not everything has improved everywhere but generally people are much better in both major and less obvious ways. The global literacy rate in 1980 was 68.8% and by 2020 it reached 86.8%. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/WLD/world/literacy-rat...
It rose for 2 years before falling again in 2022 vs 2021 so we haven’t reversed the trend.
1.35 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2022
1.37 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2021
3.35 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 1980
That’s a 60% drop over 42 years!
The data just varies quite a bit 4 years in a row saw increases 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1979 as did a 3 year stretch 1993, 1994, 1995 so do get to upset around a 2 year jump 2020 and 2021 especially when the pandemic explains differences in behavior.
haha I can't believe deaths per firearm is an actual chart on that website. if only we could sell 2x as many guns to gun owners we could make those numbers go down even more!
It's one of about 30-40 charts sure, I also don't think it's the correct way to view it. That said, it's one of the ways stats certain stats are evaluated
I counted 4 charts based on numbers of guns, but didn’t scroll though the entire thing. (Firearm Death Rate per Firearm, Homicides & Firearms Globally, Firearms vs Homicide Rate has 2)
The central error in their figures is they look at firearm rates instead of handgun rates when handguns are dramatically more likely to be linked with homicides and be considered for gun control. A NYC gun owner is not the same as an Alaskan gun owner especially in areas where owning a firearm is important for safety vs bears.
They also make some rather odd statements like 1 in 200 firearms being used in a homicide = “The risk of a firearm being used in a homicide is very low”. That rate sounds insanely high to me.
I break down exactly what you mention, there's a nice appendix at the top. I cannot help if you didn't read the whole thing, but don't claim there's an error right after you mention not reading it haha
If you're murdered in DC you're more likely to be murdered by someones fists than by a gun. When you compare that to Alaska, you're more likely be murdered in DC by fire arm, fists, knives, etc than all causes in Alaska.
In New York State, you're less likely to be murdered than in Alaska (from any cause, including gun shots).
The point I am trying to make is there isn't the correlation you think there is.
> If you're murdered in DC you're more likely to be murdered by someones fists than by a gun. When you compare that to Alaska, you're more likely be murdered in DC by fire arm, fists, knives, etc than all causes in Alaska.
You’re reading that chart incorrectly, half of DC murders are by handguns. Handguns is the dark blue at the bottom, the hands fists feet rate is the grey at the top of the bar chart.
> What are you talking about?
In 2019 ~2 million rifles and ~0.5 million shotgun vs ~3.5 million handguns were sold yet the murder rate by weapon type is vastly in favor of handguns. It’s like we can treat them as separated categories.
So what we care about is not Homicides per Firearm Owner, but Homicides per Handgun Owner etc. DC wanted a handgun ban, not an all weapon ban because over half of DC murders are by handgun.
You normalize auto deaths per mile traveled, or per capita, etc in order to eliminate discrepancies when comparing groups that might have different sized populations or different amount of car travel.
But nearly every other similar country to the U.S. does not have any meaningful gun deaths, so there’s no need to normalize because there’s no one else to compare to.
No meaning full gun deaths? Canada has around 300 per year and it’s slowly going up.
Adjusted for population, that would be around 4000 per year in the US. I’d say that’s a meaningful number even if the US reduced gun deaths to be on par with other developed countries.
That’s about the same number of people who die each year due to chronic kidney disease.
I didn't downvote you, but I tend to dislike such perspectives as I suspect it contributes to a widespread ~"We're doing ok (enough), stay the course, no need to consider substantial changes to the way we're doing things" mentality, at important times (regardless of whether it is your explicit default stance).
Indeed this is speculation, but I hope we can agree that the course we are on is a bit risky, and no one seems to know what to do (comprehensively), though many believe that they know (which is far worse than not knowing).
EDIT: in my defense, the parent comment initially was complaining about people downvoting them, so I provided some relevant information to them on the matter. Better not do that again I guess!
I find that an odd takeaway. To me seeing a 60% drop in car fatalities per mile suggests change can be accelerated and we can tackle large scale issues. The Chlorofluorocarbon ban doesn’t mean we are finished solving environmental problems, it means we can actually solve them. Similarly the drop in US CO2 emissions doesn’t mean the problem is solved, just that significant progress is achievable.
As to your edit, I wasn’t complaining about downvotes just confused. I removed the edit because someone responded with a comment about traffic fatalities so I could see why someone might disagree.
>To me seeing a 60% drop in car fatalities per mile suggests change can be accelerated and we can tackle large scale issues. The Chlorofluorocarbon ban doesn’t mean we are finished solving environmental problems, it means we can actually solve them. Similarly the drop in US CO2 emissions doesn’t mean the problem is solved, just that significant progress is achievable.
I agree - neither of these are contrary to my criticism.
Everyone likes to pat themselves on the back, but how well are we (and for me, that includes the well being of all people on the planet) doing on an absolute scale (what is possible)? This is a very odd and unpopular question.
Thirteen human cases and 686 animal infections [of guinea worm] were reported in 2022. Three human cases and 315 animal infections were reported during January–June 2023. As of August 2023, dracunculiasis remained endemic in five countries (Angola, Chad, Ethiopia, Mali, and South Sudan).
* What are the implications for public health practice?
With only 13 human cases [of guinea worm] identified in 2022 and three during January–June 2023, program efforts appear to be closer to reaching the goal of eradication. However, dog infections and impeded access because of civil unrest and insecurity in Mali and South Sudan continue to be the greatest challenges for the program.
"
And guinea worm used to destroy the lives of millions, so even if he had personally handed nukes to North Korea, the lives saved by eradicating guinea worm is a bit more than the number of people North Korea has killed with nuclear weapons.
> "tu quoque," also known as the "appeal to hypocrisy."
I'm not seeing how responding to "Jimmy Carter did something good" with "Jimmy Carter also did something bad" could possibly be characterized as a tu quoque, or as an appeal to hypocrisy in any more general sense.
A tu quoque would involve making some kind of claim about the person being addressed ("tu"), and there is no hypocrisy involved in doing two different things.
Guinea worm is close to being eradicated but it's not inevitable that it will be. As with Polio, the last cases are very hard to eradicate. In the last few years Guinea Worm has spread from humans to animals (dogs and cats) which further complicates things. Fingers crossed though.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38392277