The odds of dying increase as you get older

The data is from the CDC


Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms -
codes: (U01.4,X93–X95)
Total Deaths in 2015: 12,979

So basically the math that sigfreund posted.

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
Why multiply by 70?

42 was already taken.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
1 in 109 will die of an opioid overdose.

Well, i can tell you that the odds of me dying from that is just about zero.

I'm just guessing here - don't have time to do the rigorous statistical analysis but I am going to go out on a limb and estimate the odds are 1 in 1

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
1 in 109 will die of an opioid overdose.

Well, i can tell you that the odds of me dying from that is just about zero.

I read all the time about folks touching a white powder. First responders sometimes get it from trying to help someone who has OD'd. You also can get the OD from a medical treatment. I guess.

We also don't see an increase of risk from the victim being an asshole. I'd suggest that could dramatically increase the odds of a bunch of other risk factors.

I sit by a window and look out. I'd guess that would increase the odds of someone shooting at me and getting me. But the walls don't really offer much protection from random gunshots. My brother lives in WI. They used to leave home on deer opening day. On average they heard I think 8 bullets hit their home. They felt better about finding them later on.

So figure the odds. My wife hasn't had many auto accidents over the 50+ years she's been driving. But watching and experiencing her driving increases my odds of a heart attack significantly.

Col Cooper was asked how to avoid being a gunshot victim. He suggested avoiding places where total strangers or young adults consume alcohol. It also worked for avoiding assaults. I'm not so sure about being armed at those venues. If we're all armed, we may avoid the gunshots we see coming at us, but others might bear a greater risk. Particularly if they're drunk assholes.

I used to walk my dog late at night. Like just before bedtime. I'm not a fool, I went armed. That dramatically increases the risk for street muggers. I don't care, they chose their occupation. If they avoid trying to rob armed folks, they just might live longer.

Other things: My mother is 97 so she had a lower risk? 97 vs 70?

People in the inner city seem to bear a greater risk from knife attacks and shootings. Stay at home late at night and things will look better for you. Particularly if you're a black youth who hangs around with other black youth. Its not just race, its habits and hangouts. Now tell me a black youth would be safer being unarmed or armed at midnight down in the 'hood?

The problem with statistics is they try to view your overall risk on limited factors. I'm afraid its more complex than that.

There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics.

One of life’s great truths is never get caught doing public math, but since I’m among friends, here goes.

I think Rey’s issue is valid. The math when reverse engineered is that using that 15,000 per year number gives you a 1 in 20,000 chance of dying. Assuming a 70 year lifespan sounds simple to multiply it out but that is one wonko way to make a statistic. It is kind of like flipping a coin. If you flip heads 49times in a row the odds on the next flip are still 50/50.

If you manage to make it through the year and not get shot in the melon, the next year your odds don’t increase. They stay the same. 1 in 20,000. Not to mention using heart disease in this manner where statistically no one gets heart disease and dies in the first 30ish years.

Their math adds up but their methodology or logic using that math is highly suspect.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
One of life’s great truths is never get caught doing public math, but since I’m among friends, here goes.

I think Rey’s issue is valid. The math when reverse engineered is that using that 15,000 per year number gives you a 1 in 20,000 chance of dying. Assuming a 70 year lifespan sounds simple to multiply it out but that is one wonko way to make a statistic. It is kind of like flipping a coin. If you flip heads 49times in a row the odds on the next flip are still 50/50.

If you manage to make it through the year and not get shot in the melon, the next year your odds don’t increase. They stay the same. 1 in 20,000. Not to mention using heart disease in this manner where statistically no one gets heart disease and dies in the first 30ish years.

Their math adds up but their methodology or logic using that math is highly suspect.

I agree that your odds don't slightly increase specifically in your 21st year if you make it through your 20th year, for example. However, when you consider all of your 70 years, that's playing a 1-in-20,000-odds game 70 times in a row, so, your odds over the entire span do increase to 1 in 286, I think.

My disagreement is with the seeming assumption that your life circumstances are irrelevant to your odds. We all know better than that.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
1 in 109 will die of an opioid overdose.

If they would just outlaw opioids, that would solve that problem.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
There's lies, damn lies, and then there's statistics.

And per my stat prof, most people use statistics the way a drunk uses a lightpost, to prop themselves up rather than for the light they might shed.

"Lifetime Odds of Dying"

100%

For the "multiplying by 70 is wrong" folks...

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/...nvsr66/nvsr66_06.pdf

Total resident deaths in the USA in 2015: 2,712,630

quote:

Originally posted by Chance:
The data is from the CDC


Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms -
codes: (U01.4,X93–X95)
Total Deaths in 2015: 12,979

So basically the math that sigfreund posted.

12,979/2,712,630 = 0.00478, or 1 in 209.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
The odds of dying increase as you get older

All the way until they reach 1:1.

quote:

Originally posted by rusbro:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
One of life’s great truths is never get caught doing public math, but since I’m among friends, here goes.

I think Rey’s issue is valid. The math when reverse engineered is that using that 15,000 per year number gives you a 1 in 20,000 chance of dying. Assuming a 70 year lifespan sounds simple to multiply it out but that is one wonko way to make a statistic. It is kind of like flipping a coin. If you flip heads 49times in a row the odds on the next flip are still 50/50.

If you manage to make it through the year and not get shot in the melon, the next year your odds don’t increase. They stay the same. 1 in 20,000. Not to mention using heart disease in this manner where statistically no one gets heart disease and dies in the first 30ish years.

Their math adds up but their methodology or logic using that math is highly suspect.

I agree that your odds don't slightly increase specifically in your 21st year if you make it through your 20th year, for example. However, when you consider all of your 70 years, that's playing a 1-in-20,000-odds game 70 times in a row, so, your odds over the entire span do increase to 1 in 286, I think.

My disagreement is with the seeming assumption that your life circumstances are irrelevant to your odds. We all know better than that.

If I remember correctly, that’s not the correct way to estimate lifetime odds. It’s a bit complicated if I remember from statistics. (College level, not overtly simple high school statistics. It’s more complicated than a simple arithmetic progression.

quote:

Originally posted by smithnsig:

quote:

Originally posted by rusbro:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
One of life’s great truths is never get caught doing public math, but since I’m among friends, here goes.

I think Rey’s issue is valid. The math when reverse engineered is that using that 15,000 per year number gives you a 1 in 20,000 chance of dying. Assuming a 70 year lifespan sounds simple to multiply it out but that is one wonko way to make a statistic. It is kind of like flipping a coin. If you flip heads 49times in a row the odds on the next flip are still 50/50.

If you manage to make it through the year and not get shot in the melon, the next year your odds don’t increase. They stay the same. 1 in 20,000. Not to mention using heart disease in this manner where statistically no one gets heart disease and dies in the first 30ish years.

Their math adds up but their methodology or logic using that math is highly suspect.

I agree that your odds don't slightly increase specifically in your 21st year if you make it through your 20th year, for example. However, when you consider all of your 70 years, that's playing a 1-in-20,000-odds game 70 times in a row, so, your odds over the entire span do increase to 1 in 286, I think.

My disagreement is with the seeming assumption that your life circumstances are irrelevant to your odds. We all know better than that.

If I remember correctly, that’s not the correct way to estimate lifetime odds. It’s a bit complicated if I remember from statistics. (College level, not overtly simple high school statistics. It’s more complicated than a simple arithmetic progression.

You are right that the exact calculation is more complicated, but it's a reasonable way to get a ballpark estimate.

View it from the other direction. Your odds of dying do increase each year. How many 100 year old's are you aware of? There are lots of 70 year old's, even here. Not any 100s that I know of. So if you ask what your odds are of dying from a gunshot, your method seems to make sense.

But we're all doing to die, just like everyone who ever went before us did. Soon it will be our turn. Try as you will, you can't escape it.

So again, back to basics. The odds of you dying is 100% or 1:1. When you are 21, you have pretty good odds of making it to 22. But if you're 99, you have pretty bad odds of making it to 100. A woman I knew didn't make it to 100. I don't know the cause, but maybe it was "Natural causes". I'm pretty sure old Wilma wasn't out partying.

So we're confusing inescapable health issues with activities we do have control over. But you're still gonna die.

quote:

Originally posted by rburg:
But you're still gonna die.

Nah. I identify as immortal.

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Where's 'clothes shopping with spouse'?

About 20 years ago. My unit had a "Sweethearts Ball" on the base for Valentines Day. It was a civilian formal dress ball. I just returned from Korea and had had a tuxedo tailor made while I was there. My wife needed a civilian dress (she had a Mess Dress, but it wouldn't work). So I'm with her at one of the big mall department stores while she's looking for a civilian dress.
So I'm sitting on a bench by the fitting rooms while my wife is going through the store inventory in said fitting room. Another woman comes to the fitting rooms with an armload of clothes and has her 6-7 year old son in tow. So he sits on the opposite end of the bench.
After about 5 minutes he asks me how long I've been waiting. I told him about an hour. He says this is the third store he's been waiting in that day. I asked him if he planned on getting married some day. He said no, he doesn't like department stores. Kid had it figured out at 6 years old.

quote:

For the "multiplying by 70 is wrong" folks...https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/...nvsr66/nvsr66_06.pdfTotal resident deaths in the USA in 2015: 2,712,630

So the "odds" again seem to mean that if I had died in 2015 (I don't think that I did, but I would probably be that last one to know) the odds are 1:209 that it would have been from "gun" assault. I posit that that bit of information is about as worthless as any I have ever heard.

It has absolutely nothing to do with speculating about how likely any of us are going to die from "gun" assault in the future. I put "gun" in scare quotes because while I have encountered many guns, I have never been assaulted by one. It is I suppose, barely possible that I might some day be assaulted by a human using a gun.