There is a web site where the owner works very hard on statistics relating to gun-control and crime worldwide as well as US and local. Like the Watts Up With That site does with the global warming/climate change statistics. His posts are full of numbers, graphs, and links to sources for the numbers. In one off main topic post there was this line:
It might also help the general understanding to note that approximately seven percent of “actual rapes” result in pregnancy.
This piqued my interest as during the Todd Akin affair the left kept saying 5% to 7% of rapes result in pregnancy but the things they linked to didn’t seem to be well done studies so in a comment I asked for his source for the number. He gave me this site as his source which has this line:
1 in 15 rape victims become pregnant as a result of being raped (11).
Now aside from the obvious bias of the source they put a number at the end of the line (11) which implies a footnote on the source but they have none and instead have a long list of unlinked “references” and the an even longer listing of “For additional information please see:” which are links but nothing to show where the number came from.
So I replied and pointed to this source study which does cite a number, but I pointed out that the numbers they have in their abstract make no sense either compared to real world sources or to even themselves as I will show below.
He just blew me off, nicely, never deigning to even acknowledge that I sourced a large number studies which conflict with the only one which has a number close to what he put out. If I can’t even get a numbers guy to look at how the left bends truth in areas other than his own stamping ground I despair for ever getting this country back as everyone knows the left lies about the one thing they care about but they then trust them in all else as being truthful.
The one study that the left links has this abstract of their study.
OBJECTIVE: We attempted to determine the national rape-related pregnancy rate and provide descriptive characteristics of pregnancies that result from rape. STUDY DESIGN: A national probability sample of 4008 adult American women took part in a 3-year longitudinal survey that assessed the prevalence and incidence of rape and related physical and mental health outcomes.
RESULTS: The national rape-related pregnancy rate is 5.0% per rape among victims of reproductive age (aged 12 to 45); among adult women an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year. Among 34 cases of rape-related pregnancy, the majority occurred among adolescents and resulted from assault by a known, often related perpetrator. Only 11.7% of these victims received immediate medical attention after the assault, and 47.1% received no medical attention related to the rape. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester; 32.2% opted to keep the infant whereas 50% underwent abortion and 5.9% placed the infant for adoption; an additional 11.8% had spontaneous abortion.
CONCLUSIONS: Rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency. It is a cause of many unwanted pregnancies and is closely linked with family and domestic violence. As we address the epidemic of unintended pregnancies in the United States, greater attention and effort should be aimed at preventing and identifying unwanted pregnancies that result from sexual victimization. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:320-5.)
So they studied 4008 woman in age from 12 to 45 for 3 years and those 4008 women had 34 rape related pregnancies over those 3 years and that those pregnancies were 5% of the rapes that occurred to those 4008 women in that 3 year period. That nationwide there are 32,101 rape related pregnancies per year.
Using their figures.
That means that there were a total of 680 rapes [34/.05] to those 4008 women over 3 years. 226.67 per year for a rape rate of 5655 per 100,000 per year [100,000/4008 x 226.67].
In 2002 there were 61,561,000 women in the US aged 15 to 44 (smaller group than 12-45 but close enough). The rape rate their study has leads to there being 3,481,274 rapes [5655 x 615.61] and at 5% 174,063 pregnancies from rape.
Now the FBI reports in this time period roughly 90,000 to 95,000 forcible rapes per year. A rate of 33 per 100,000. If there are 32,101 rape related pregnancies then about 34% result in pregnancy which would be huge.
What this means is the numbers in the study are twisted somehow. Maybe most of the “women” are 12 to 20 and thus are of the age that is very fertile. Even in that case they still are getting too many rapes and too many pregnancies to make sense but they would be closer. But whatever the study which is supposed to refute Akin’s premise is flawed, badly flawed to use to prove what he said as being wrong but I can’t even get someone who does numbers day and night to look at it and see that the left twists things outside what he knows they twist.
This is not the only time I’ve seen people know that the left and the media lie about things that they know about but then turn around and believe them on things they don’t know about, accepting those lies as truth in all the other things where they have no expertise and not bother to look at the lies when they are pointed to.
As I said this is why I despair.
Are the FBI reports only stating reported rapes, or are they trying to estimate actual numbers (assumed to be significantly higher than those reported)? If they are actual reported numbers, that’s where your math goes wrong.
I also think it’s foolish to state repetitively that this is only a tactic of the left. This is a tactic of persuasive people everywhere… the left, the right, salesman, lobbyists, journalists, marketers, etc. The fact that you state it, without evidence, in an article griping about people stating things without evidence, is ironic.
As an avid reader of the site you linked, I don’t see him as blowing you off completely, just “not where I can answer”. Lord knows I’ve done that many times.
Now, there’s also the other disheartening fact that things people aren’t interested in will generally not have them jumping through hoops to look at the details. Heck, I usually get one or two footnotes in and call it a day. I simply don’t have hours to spend tracking down every possible footnote, then its footnotes then its footnotes etc.
At some point, we have to make do with the data we have. And the “sniff test” is as good as any to short circuit a long, fruitless search.
Don’t despair too much. Just remember people who are interested in number as they apply to X may not be interested in numbers themselves.
. . . this is only a tactic of the left.
Only? I’m looking, but not seeing where Geoff makes that claim — as opposed to the simple claim that they lie. I just don’t see any exclusivity — which in turn means that other categories and classes may do it too.
So. It makes even less sense to accuse him of doing so “repetitively”, when it isn’t possible to see the single instance.
Can we call them lies, damned lies, damned statistics, global-warming statistics, left-wing cause statistics, and rape statistics?
Stats are devilishly hard to correctly interpret and just as easy to fudge.
First the Akin affair was over “legitimate rape” and the sentence I quoted was about “actual” rape both of which can be logically assumed to be about “forcible” rape. The FBI data is about reported forcible rape, so yes there would be some that are not reported.
But to make the case that was made over this by using this study it would have to be assumed that there are 35 forcible rapes not reported to the police for every 1 that is reported. That is quite a leap and one which should give anyone pause as to whether like is being compared to like or if the study itself is flawed somehow.
All are assumed to be pushing a certain viewpoint and perhaps lying.
However my point was that, for the media and the Left, finding them lying in an area where you know the truth doesn’t seem to then carry over to being skeptical about them in areas where you don’t have expertise. This skepticism does seem to be applied to the Right and to salesmen lobbyists and marketeers once they are found to be lying in one instance.
The site is one I go to daily. I was just using that as an instance to make the point stated above. Not as a criticism of “stranger” himself who was very courteous as always.
Sdferr, maybe. If the claim isn’t clear to you, it’s at least ambiguous or misleading by omission. Making statements like “look at how the left bends truth” is at least suggesting that this is unique or unusual. It’s suggesting a comparison, even if the comparison is vague or unclear.
It is factually correct, but logically incorrect.
If there was a statement like “many police detectives look at child porn”, what would you think? It’s factually correct, because many police detectives indeed look at child porn in order to comb evidence and prosecute cases. However, there is obviously something misleading, or sufficiently ambiguous to allow you to come to incorrect interpretations.
Making statements like “look at how the left bends truth” is at least suggesting that this is unique or unusual.
Well sorry, but that’s just nonsense. There’s nothing suggesting a unique or unusual relationship to mendacity at all. But then, I’m a careful reader who doesn’t like to import into texts matter that just isn’t there.
Michael Crichton’s Gell-Mann Amnesia effect.
I have a very intelligent friend who is literally a rocket scientist and will do this all the time particularly with CNN reporting.
Given that one of the central theses upon which this web site is founded revolves around the Left’s continuing efforts to subvert language, interpretation, and meaning, and another thesis is the Left’s invasion and perversion of the media and academic worlds, I don’t think it’s out of bounds for the author to make his argument in terms of Leftist abuse of research projects and press conferences.
Every reader here is aware that we are also lied to every day by marketers, PR reps, politicians on “our” side — hell, I’ve quit believing half the shit I hear from my own family! I hardly think Geoff is going to lead us all into believing nonsense.
But hey, you just keep picking that nit. Who am I to complain?
Exactly squid, the thing that always amazes me is that you should always be skeptical or analytical of those who you believe are on your side. The left seems to be willing to swallow anything as long as the guy has a D next to his name, teaches at a liberal university, etc.
This is equivalent to not be a little skeptical of the motives of a televangelist asking for cash just because he says he believes in God.
Oh pick them cherries on the high limbs
Bend and pick them low
But pick them cherries carefully
Or the boss will know.
Pick them Cherries that are round
And pick them cherries red.
Pick those cherries with a tiny little pit
And leave the rest for dead.
Pick your cherries carefully
And do it for the dale
‘Cause those cherries didn’t happen
If they aren’t aren’t the ones on sale.
O/T, but another reason to despair: New Mexico Court: Christian Photographer Cannot Refuse Gay-Marriage Ceremony
http://tinyurl.com/ky9c2za
Shocked, I tell you…
Meet the new slavemasters: this time, they’ll be fabulous.
Also, “chick with a camera” == “public accommodations”, apparently. If it serves the cause. Not that that case was decided correctly either, but hey, stare decisis and all. Gotta respect the Rule of Law, don’tcha know.
I’m sure by shopping around one could find a photographer willing to do the job. This is not about equal treatment, it is about coercion.
i’d charge the gaysters alot more because they are different from a normal marriage
Richard Epstein: Touching on public accommodations, though it’s more a tale of two Butlers.
I don’t despair.
But I am reading up on how dissidents survived in Soviet Russia.
polar bear game cont.
WWII vet, beaten by teens outside Eagles Lodge, dies
Thank you bgbear. I knew I had read something similar somewhere but couldn’t remember enough to have google pull it up for me.
Link.
A shame Chelsea Manning can’t closely and personally test these statistics whilst in Leavenworth.
proggtardia news
Sheep Protest! – FREAKING HILARIOUS!!
King Barry Obazm has gotten bored, so he’s decided to board a bus for a road-trip to shoot some problem picked at random in the back. Makes for a nifty initiation into the gang of rulership.
I should have been more careful to say “to shoot a domestic problem picked at random in the back”, since as His Majesty knows, it is to domestic problems that the Executive powers are devoted to the near negligent exclusion of all others.
One wouldn’t want confusion to arise over some odious foreign dictator’s murderous chemical weapons attacks on his own people, and thus to be mistaken for the sort of problem to which our own SuperUltraHighMinded Emperor assigns his profound capacities. On the other hand, there does not seem to be any confusion as to these matters overseas, or at our own borders, even.
But I am reading up on how dissidents survived in Soviet Russia.
suggestion: “the power of the powerless” by havel
Serr8d, I have a feeling Pvt. Manning is going to have every opportunity to “feel like a woman” once he gets to Leavenworth.
Whether he wants to or not.
I [voice catch, lower lip bite] feel your pain [finger wag with the thumb thing so you don’t actually point your finger at someone] Geoff. Reminds me of trying to get a certain Shillman Fellow to admit to a hasty error about kitchen knife confiscation in Great Britain. From the bottom of a memory hole.
We care about the things we care about and about the things we don’t, we don’t.
I’d demand payment upfront and then deliver the most excellent photos of the food and of people’s shoes.
. A total 32.4% of these victims did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester;
Huh? That stat screams bullshit. To not know you’re pregnant for three months? Gee – I was raped, I’m tired, I feel like crap, and I haven’t had a period in months. Something is fishy.
I suppose they could argue that these people are low-information folks, but shesh. That undercuts the entire premise of our Public education system.
But I am reading up on how dissidents survived in Soviet Russia.
You might also look to Argentina for examples of how to ride out an economic death spiral. (I’m fortunate enough to live just a few hours from an undefended border into a functioning first-world country, so I figure my impromptu import/export/currency exchange business should do well.)
Somebody won the #ObamaTourBusNames thread already.
Geoffb, thank you for looking into this. Very few people ever bother to actually examine the math behind these claims…and both Akin and the Republican party were viciously smeared with the claim that his statements were demonstrably, damnably false.
Statistics can say Whatever A Person Wants Them To Say…when they are presented to an audience that doesn’t know how to interpret them. That includes pretty much e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y these days. Statistical analysis is actually a very precise branch of mathematics that even the highly educated barely touch upon. And, like any type of math, the slightest screw-up in its process will invalidate the conclusion…just like (2+2)-1 will be wrong if you mess up the 2+2 part.
So, if you can’t rely upon the number from the “experts,” how can you know whether or not Akin should have been derided for his position? Hmm. How about we look at the information we DO understand? Rape is a very stressful, traumatic experience for a woman, and stress has been well-known to interfere with a woman’s ability to get pregnant as well as being a cause of miscarriage.
Uh, yeah, Akin was such an idiot to suggest that a woman’s body has ways of shutting down pregnancy when forcibly raped. WAY off base there.
And this is why I’m getting my master’s in statistics, because even in science they’re used to give a veneer of authenticity to a claim–not to provide any new or supporting information.