4 ms·

Another example related to children - in 1993 guidance changed from having children sleep on their front to having them sleep on their backs. The result was a r

Another example related to children - in 1993 guidance changed from having children sleep on their front to having them sleep on their backs. The result was a reduction in SIDS deaths from 0.13% to 0.035%. However the rate of kids having a flat spot on the back of their heads increased to 47% of 2 month olds. That flat spot pushes the rest of their skull forward and can result in a prominent forehead and misshapen features (iow, makes your kid ugly). Is the trade off between a 0.1% reduction in death rate worth a 50% chance of being ugly?

lucasmullens 6y ago
Are you really under the impression half of everyone is ugly because they slept on their backs?
dragonwriter 6y ago
> 0.1% reduction in death rate 73% reduction in death rate, but also 0.95 percentage point reduction. > 50% chance of being ugly? No, a less than 50% chance of a condition that can (but does not always) produce ugliness.
LasEspuelas 6y ago
If you ever tried to console a parent who lost a child while he was sleeping, you would want to reduce the death rate as much as possible, no matter how many extra uglies we get.
spenczar5 6y ago
Do you have a cite for that 47% figure?