I’m surprised it is as high as you claim! You’re saying that for that age group, in a given year, the chances are 1 in 200 of dying? That seems like pretty bad odds on something that is literally life and death.
Minor correction: it's actually nearly a 2% chance of dying (1.7%), after Delta became the dominant variant. Folks never really upgraded their talking points but subjectively 2% feels _much_ higher than 1%.
There’s also the Turkey fallacy - Turkeys that are smug about knowing the Gambler’s fallacy keep thinking their survival is independent of their age, until people eat them. My probability of dying goes up with each year as well, it’s not constant.
Think the probability of the machine shutting down in the next minute is independent of age, but it shutting off in the next 100 years is certain. There’s a line or curve that should indicate probability of shutting down before OP writes the replacement.
The chance-of-death plots should be logarithmic, so we can tell if this exponential is really a good fit. On linear plots, it's hard to distinguish exponential decays from 1/x^n decays.
reply