Skip to comments.Could it be possible.....(Vanity)
Posted on 08/31/2017 1:52:49 PM PDT by Dr. Zzyzx
Could it be possible that during a major hurricane like Harvey that actually LESS people die in a city than would die on a regular day?
For the most part, during a hurricane, people are inside their homes or shelters sitting still, when on other days they might be out on the freeway, playing sports, digging trenches, etc. etc.
It also seems that unless there are some extreme situations, suicides and homicides would drop during such an event because people are focusing on getting to safety more than they are on their emotions or on seeking revenge.
In 2012, Harris County, Texas had 1,342 deaths from accidents, 431 from suicide, and from 356 homicides, for a total in those categories of 2,129, or 5.83 per day. So for the five days that match the hurricane--29.15 deaths.
The current death count for Harvey in Harris County is 30 so at the moment my theory is off, but not by much. Many more bodies have yet to be found as well, but I just started thinking that my theory just MIGHT be possible for some of the hurricanes that land on our shores.
This is just a seat-of-the pants question. If anyone has any better numbers or information, could you please share it?
So far, Harvey has killed less people that murders in a Chicago weekend.
Or close to it.
I think you are on to something here.
Yea, but while the total number of deaths may be lower, those who would be expected to die, elderly, out of shape heart attacks waiting to happen, drug addicts etc are surviving while the younger, healthier people might get swept up in a flood.
So not to say the wrong people are dying, but not the ones for whom it would be less of a surprise.
Well, yeah! That’s true for sure isn’t it?
The libernoids are not going to like this anomoly.
It has been a known fact that during doctor’s strikes fewer people die. Yes, probably.
When I was a kid newspapers regularly published the number of people who were expected to die during a given construction project. These were actuarial estimates. The practice of discussing those was stopped because it looked like politicians were planning on killing people with each new bridge or public works.
Doing anything carries with it the prospect that a percentage of the participants will die. Accidents, old age, and acts of God have a mathematical probability. Several years ago, I calculated the number of people who died in the city where I live on any given day. I don’t recall the number, but it was a startlingly large one. Mostly, they were natural causes. The older the population, the higher the number. At one point, 5000 people from the World War II generation were dying each and every day.
“It has been a known fact that during doctors strikes fewer people die.”
I recall that happening decades ago — in India, I think. Doctors went on strike. Mortality rate decreased.
This is a valid question worth pursuing.
While I agree, and have always thought, that some deaths reported during major events such as this were deaths that would have occurred anyway, I think that your general thesis is faulty.
Do the thirty or so flood-related deaths include accidents, suicides, and homicides that are also occurring? I doubt it. Also, what about the rate of natural deaths? I would suspect that deaths from heart attack, for one example, would be higher during the trauma of a flood. Since death from natural causes would be the number one cause of death in most places, any significant increase during a flood would mean that the overall death rate, not just the deaths normally attributable to a flood or hurricane, would be higher. If that is the case, then the thirty reported deaths would be deceptively low.
Just my two cents.
“So far, Harvey has killed less people that murders in a Chicago weekend.”
I was just that that to the Mrs. tonight while watching The Five.