Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Will 15% of all women really be assa - (nf)
Message-ID: <1962@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 2-Sep-84 08:42:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: randvax.1962
Posted: Sun Sep  2 08:42:54 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Sep-84 05:18:01 EDT
References: <18900007@smu.UUCP>, <135@apl-uw.UUCP>
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 28

] From: bill@apl-uw.UUCP (Bill Hanot)
]
] Your method of computing this statistic ignores the fact that over
] 50 years the population will not be static; many new women will be
] born or move into the population, as others will die or move out.
]
] I would suspect for a population of 500,000 women in a city over
] 50 years, the number of different women living there for some period
] would number several million at least, so that really throws your
] results out the window, doesn't it?
]
] Note: this is not to deny the seriousness of rape as a societal
]       problem.  Let's just watch carefully how we play with numbers.

Let's watch carefully, indeed.  The figures used are rates, and not
absolute numbers, so increasing/decreasing population is compensated
for.  The result is a rate, too, though for emphasis the question ``what
are the results of this rate over an average lifetime'' is asked.  I
think most people are smart enough to realize that this is valid only
for someone who actually spends their life there (though, of course,
``you gotta live somewhere'').  And there certainly are a lot more
assumptions built into an aggregate statistic of this type (such as
the assumption that the current rate will remain constant).  However, it
does give a *feel* for the degree of risk that I don't think is
inaccurate.

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall