Yes. "From 2019-2022, pedestrian deaths tripled in Vermont!" sounds alarming and then you see it went from 1 to 3. It's still bad that people died, and bad th

Yes. "From 2019-2022, pedestrian deaths tripled in Vermont!" sounds alarming and then you see it went from 1 to 3. It's still bad that people died, and bad that it's more, but that would really be reaching for clickbait territory. And is it even a rate at all? They give number of fatalities, but how does that compare to the number of pedestrians? Or rather number x time spent walking? Car statistics are often given in terms of total miles traveled, for instance. A total is not a rate. Totally agree our streets are way too dangerous, and being a pedestrian can be terrifying. That really needs to be fixed. But not in a misleading way. If anything, things like this might scare people out of walking, meaning less pedestrians, and therefore less reason to solve it. That's counterproductive.