If the narrative of the rate of death in childbirth was wrong because the increase was simply a matter of changing the way we count that figure, isn't that increase still very concerning if in fact the new way of counting is better? If the change to the calculation of that rate is a good change, the right change, and making that change indicates that the rate is a lot higher than it was as previously calculated, isn't that a big deal even if it is technically a change based on how the rate is calculated?
I think you're all being way, way too cute about this.
I don't know what you're talking about - it doesn't indicate the rate "is a lot higher" than was previously calculated. it shows the opposite -- that it's been relatively the same since 1999. the adjusted metric showed 10.4 deaths per 100,000 births instead of 32.9 deaths per 100,000. no one believes 10 are deaths are OK, either.
That's not what I asked you. The point is that IF THE NEW WAY TO CALCULATE THE STATISTIC IS SUPERIOR TO THE OLD WAY AND IT SHOWS A HIGHER RATE THAN THE OLD WAY, THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS AN INDICATION OF A SOCIAL PROBLEM. Whether the rate has increased is not the socially important issue! What's important is whether our PERCEPTION of the size of the problem was wrong!
It's a really impoverished thing, to live your entire life based on the need to be smarter than everyone else.
If the narrative of the rate of death in childbirth was wrong because the increase was simply a matter of changing the way we count that figure, isn't that increase still very concerning if in fact the new way of counting is better? If the change to the calculation of that rate is a good change, the right change, and making that change indicates that the rate is a lot higher than it was as previously calculated, isn't that a big deal even if it is technically a change based on how the rate is calculated?
I think you're all being way, way too cute about this.
I don't know what you're talking about - it doesn't indicate the rate "is a lot higher" than was previously calculated. it shows the opposite -- that it's been relatively the same since 1999. the adjusted metric showed 10.4 deaths per 100,000 births instead of 32.9 deaths per 100,000. no one believes 10 are deaths are OK, either.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/03/13/1238269753/maternal-mortality-overestimate-deaths-births-health-disparities
https://www.vox.com/2024/3/16/24102224/maternal-mortality-rate-study-united-states
That's not what I asked you. The point is that IF THE NEW WAY TO CALCULATE THE STATISTIC IS SUPERIOR TO THE OLD WAY AND IT SHOWS A HIGHER RATE THAN THE OLD WAY, THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS AN INDICATION OF A SOCIAL PROBLEM. Whether the rate has increased is not the socially important issue! What's important is whether our PERCEPTION of the size of the problem was wrong!
It's a really impoverished thing, to live your entire life based on the need to be smarter than everyone else.