this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
1283 points (99.7% liked)

Science Memes

11253 readers
4498 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So 0.6% chance of being a vehicle owner being involved in a fatal accident over a ten year timespan? 0.06% over a single year?

Sounds pretty safe to me.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The injury rate is about 70 times higher though.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The point I’m trying to make is that absolute risk numbers are far more useful than stating relative risk, especially once we get below the average person’s acceptable risk tolerance. Saying “this country is xx times safer than this country” can be misleading.

For example, if we consider a hypothetical country that has 1 traffic death per 100,000 vehicles you could make the statement that, “the Netherlands has 6x more traffic deaths than hypothetical country!” It would make the Netherlands seem like a dangerous place to live, but I’d wager that the vast majority of people would feel perfectly comfortable with the idea of being in traffic in the Netherlands.