21
Physiology & Medicine / How bad can stats reporting be in mainstream media?
« on: 24/02/2020 20:56:33 »
CNN (I know... I bring it upon myself... it is one of many news outlets I get my info from) had an interesting article online today, concerning the usage rates of seniors (65+) using cannabis. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/24/health/weed-marijuana-seniors-wellness/index.html )
But the discussion of the statistics was SOOO BAD, I have to vent here!
In one excerpt:
2.4% is not twice 0.4% (that's a sixfold increase), and 4.2% is not twice 2.4% (1.75x is not terribly far from 2x, butt still...)
But simple arithmetic issues are only some of it.
They go on to say (a few paragraphs later)
Huh? If only 2.4% of seniors reported using marijuana in 2015, how did 2.9% use marijuana and alcohol? And again, if 4.2% of seniors reported using marijuana in 2018, how did 6.3% use marijuana and alcohol?
Presumably they are discussing different datasets or different studies or different definitions of "use" or something.... but come on! This is the most basic aspect of reporting science... no wonder people don't trust science!
(sorry for the rant)
But the discussion of the statistics was SOOO BAD, I have to vent here!
In one excerpt:
Quote
In 2006, only 0.4% of seniors over 65 reported using marijuana products in the past year, they said. The newly published study found that by 2015, the number had doubled to 2.4%. By 2018, it had doubled again, with 4.2% of seniors over 65 using weed.
2.4% is not twice 0.4% (that's a sixfold increase), and 4.2% is not twice 2.4% (1.75x is not terribly far from 2x, butt still...)
But simple arithmetic issues are only some of it.
They go on to say (a few paragraphs later)
Quote
One of the most disturbing findings, he said, was an increase in cannabis use among older adults who also use alcohol. In 2015, only 2.9% of seniors reported both alcohol and cannabis use (although the data cannot say if they use simultaneously). By 2018 it had jumped to 6.3%.
Huh? If only 2.4% of seniors reported using marijuana in 2015, how did 2.9% use marijuana and alcohol? And again, if 4.2% of seniors reported using marijuana in 2018, how did 6.3% use marijuana and alcohol?
Presumably they are discussing different datasets or different studies or different definitions of "use" or something.... but come on! This is the most basic aspect of reporting science... no wonder people don't trust science!
(sorry for the rant)