4 ms·
That graph showing survival probability as near 1 for age 0 can't be correct, since mortality is significantly higher in birth and immediately after, then drops
by kingkawn 15y ago
That graph showing survival probability as near 1 for age 0 can't be correct, since mortality is significantly higher in birth and immediately after, then drops for a long time, then shoots up again in old age. This is at least true in westernized countries that have medical care available.
- ArchD 15y agoObviously, this is a simplification. Infants die for other reasons that you can think of to be different from the reasons for which old people die (e.g. cancer), and these reasons are being factored out of the graph.
- ryusage 15y agoI thought the point of the graph was that it didn't matter how or why the people died though? Isn't that part of why it's so surprising?
- yelsgib 15y agoThe point of the graph is that it doesn't matter how or why people die, after a certain age. This is clear from context, though not explicitly stated.
- ajkessler 15y agoSignificantly higher relative to life expectancy of someone who makes it to 10 years old, but still incredibly low in the Western world. It's likely close enough to 0 that it just isn't visible on the graph.
- benjoffe 15y agoThere's also a rise in late adolescence when risk taking and suicide are much higher.