Leave a comment

Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 drdoug December 16 2014, 20:31:38 UTC
Thanks for posting that. I love that stuff. The news is full of the worst stuff that's happening; the good stuff happens more slowly and has terrible news value. Even the things Bill Gates picked out here are news-ed up.

I got a bit depressed recently when there was another ONS release of mortality data ... and so far as I can see, not one single large news organisation picked it up. Because the story was the same as last year, and the year before, and the year before: fewer people are dying. Overall, out of everyone, all causes included, significantly fewer deaths last year. This is excellent news! It's about as good news as you could reasonably hope for! But except it's not news at all. It's just good stuff that you can only point to in the most distant and abstract sense. It's impossible to personalise: the people who would've died either didn't get ill, so they just didn't know, or they did get seriously ill, in which case they're still going to rate it as a pretty rum year overall even though they made it.

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 andrewducker December 16 2014, 20:46:35 UTC
The clear answer is for everyone to get ill at least once per year, and seriously so once per five years, so that they can feel good about not being dead.

(And yes, it is sad that more good news isn't publicly visible!)

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 drdoug December 16 2014, 21:18:52 UTC
Yes! It's the Revolutionary Communist Party argument for health statistics! We must oppose attempts to improve things and instead make them very, very much worse than they are, so that people want them to be better, which will at some later date, by some convoluted and fanciful mechanism, result in them getting better ...

I think there's something profound about what we like about news that means that this stuff just can't work as news, even with the most noble intentions. I suspect I am quite unusually fond of, say, charts showing long term improvement trends, and even I hardly mention them or pass them on via Twitter or LJ.

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 andrewducker December 16 2014, 21:52:49 UTC
I think people are generally disinclined to believe that things do, or indeed _can_ get better.

Which is a massive shame, because they do. An awful lot of the time.

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 franklanguage December 17 2014, 04:43:31 UTC
The thing I see wrong with fewer people dying is that this will lead to overcrowding of the planet faster than if death had progressed at its previous pace. Oh, I know in countries like Scotland, to have fewer people dying is good news. And even in overcrowded countries like India, it's a good thing to save lives.

But eventually we will reach critical mass; we've already passed Peak Oil and Peak Water-the state of declining supply (of oil and water, respectively, and increasing demand.)

Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but that's my take on it.

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 drdoug December 17 2014, 05:46:18 UTC
Increasing and ageing populations are not without challenges, sure. But dealing with improved health and longevity is a fantastic problem to have. Nobody would suggest we should deal with the problem by killing more people!

I very much agree that there are huge problems with the large large and growing human population, and there this year's news isn't so good: we previously thought that the demographic shift was occurring fast enough that world population would probably peak during the C21st, but now it's not looking so likely (see e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/18/world-population-new-study-11bn-2100).

The obvious solutions to do better on that are very appealing though - increased education for women and better access to contraception. At least, they're appealing to me; clearly not everyone in, say, Nigeria feels the same way or this would be less of a problem.

Reply

Re: Good News You May Have Missed in 2014 andrewducker December 17 2014, 09:21:20 UTC
Yeah, but the answer to that is less births, not more deaths.

And that's happening (if not as quickly as I'd like.)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up