The scandal of statistical fail

Ugh! Here goes Rina David. Again.

"No woman should die giving life" is the slogan emblazoned on the back cover of the notebook I am currently using, a giveaway of the UN Population Fund.

It’s a slogan that I would think most everyone would agree with, unless one believes that it is only "natural" or worse, "right" that women should die as a consequence of getting pregnant or giving birth.

Still, I cannot believe that a senator, backed up by a group that goes by the ironic name "Filipinos for Life," ridicules the claim of supporters of the reproductive health bill that up to 11 women die each day due to causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. The anti-RH group cautioned "against excessive emotional use of the outdated statistic to influence Philippine government policy," claiming that the more accurate figure for maternal mortality in the country should be 4.8 to 8.3 deaths a day.

What scandalizes me is not that the daily toll of maternal deaths has purportedly been exaggerated, but that "Filipinos for Life" could cite the "lower" figure without expressing some form of grief or anger that even one mother should still be dying while pregnant or giving birth in this day and age.

What scandalizes ME is that Rina David deliberately ignores the issue at hand: the misrepresentation of questionable statistics. What scandalizes me further is her deliberate misrepresentation of the FilipinosForLife (F4L) statement. She takes umbrage that F4L could cite the figure --

"without expressing some form of grief or anger",

-- even as she quotes F4L further "the anti-RH group cautioned against excessive emotional use of the outdated statistic to influence Philippine government policy". Her blatant twisting of the F4L statement is evident as the immediately preceding statement of that quote (which she disingenuously omits) debunks her accusation quite clearly:

"F4L (Filipinos For Life) clarified that it does not downplay the problem of maternal deaths, stating that it is a problem that needs concrete solutions, like more birthing centers and midwives".

I know it is an opinion piece from Rina, but at least she should be honest.

Nothing separates her mind-boggling article from a recent posting from the usual suspects: the FFreethinkers Failblog.

Based on official government statistics, an estimated 6.5 to 11 maternal deaths occurred per day in 2010. The anti-RH group Filipinos for Life produced a lower estimate by the simple trick of using registered births in its calculation, ignoring the warning from its source, the National Statistics Office, that the published number is lower than actual due to late or non-registration.

Using a new statistical model, the World Health Organization (WHO) did come up with a lower estimate of maternal mortality for the country in 2008: 2,100 at the middle of the range, some 5.8 maternal deaths per day. Because of the inherent difficulties in recording maternal deaths, which the WHO report extensively discusses, varying methods which come up with varying but overlapping estimates is not unusual.

Note -- "due to late or non-registration" --- the questionable statistic is clearly extrapolated to their biased ends. A good question is: how could one get a reasonable estimate of late and non-registration? Hmm. The real low-down is why the pro-RH crowd kept on highlighting the "11 mothers die everyday" for eons upon eons without giving the slightest hint of the varying methods in estimation and the wide range of figures? Now that they are taken to task for not being completely honest about the statistical caveats, they finally admit the wide range but cry unfair. UNFAIR? I wonder what more these people have been hiding.

As for Rina David being scandalized............epic...fail.

Akbayan’s tirade: FAIL

(reposted with permission)

Maybe Senator Tito Sotto just wants to echo Mark Twain, but that is just my hunch.

Anyway...

ProLife advocacy group FilipinosForLife reacts (rightly so) by assailing the vitriol directed at Senator Tito Sotto for his interpellation of the sponsors of the RH bill in the Senate. Here goes...
/
FILIPINOS FOR LIFE OFFICIAL STATEMENT:

Akbayan’s tirade vs. Sotto unfair, out of context, narrow-minded

FILIPINOS FOR LIFE (F4L) strongly condemns Akbayan Citizens’ Action Party for unfairly and maliciously accusing Senator Tito Sotto of ignoring the plight of women.

The statement by Akbayan’s youth leader is at best narrow-minded and out of context.

Sotto was merely questioning the basis of the oft-repeated statistic of 11 maternal deaths a day, in the context of a legislative debate on a bill that seeks to establish a wide-ranging national policy. It is therefore fair to examine the basis of this bill. THERE IS NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE FOR.

In the first place, there was no derogatory statement on women, and the sarcasm, if at all, is directed at foreign lobby groups, some of them pro-abortion, that routinely peddle this statistic. The supposed offense is in the creative, nay, malicious imagination of Akbayan’s propagandists.
...
Likewise, may we remind former Rep. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel to elevate the level of the debate on RH. Her repeated references in social networks to an incident decades ago involving a dead movie starlet are uncalled for and below the belt.

Read the full statement here.
/

Indeed there is NOTHING, absolutely nothing to apologize for. Imagine, demanding an apology to ALL mothers for simply questioning a questionable statistic being irresponsibly bandied about ad nauseam: 11 mothers die everyday due to pregnancy. The corollary is that if contraceptives are freely distributed at taxpayers expense, the tragedy of mothers dying would be thwarted. The illogic behind this silly presumption has long been thrashed.

All pregnant mothers deserve genuine health care: pre-natal, delivery, and post-natal. The analogy behind the RH Bill folly goes this way: If many students are failing in a class, the obvious solution to reducing the failure rate is to reduce the number of students. Following this line of faulty line of reasoning, the RH bill aims to reduce the number of pregnancies and presto: the number of maternal deaths is obliterated magically.

Since when has official statistics been recognized as gospel truth that anyone who questions it should be derided and demanded of an apology? Are NSO statistics so infallible, sacred and beyond reproach? Whatever happened to the questioning mind according the sacred principle of "freethinking"? Note that these same people who takes offense at a simple gesture of questioning the "sacredness" of official statistics are the very same people who expresses no qualms about the desecration of the image of Christ under the pretense of a so-called "freedom" of artistic expression. They now deny Senator Sotto the simple freedom to question a questionable statistic? At any rate this is not the first time that official statistics have been rightfully called into question. Dr Bernardo Villegas and Dr Paco Sandejas have already questioned the official population figures before on an academic, empirical level. The proper response to Senator Sotto should have been to objectively defend the claimed soundness of the "11 maternal deaths" statistic, but no, all they can muster is a character assassination of the good Senator. Imagine Risa Hontiveros responding to the challenge by digging up an old, old controversy about a movie starlet just to heap dirt upon Senator Sotto. Look at these people who's so fond of insisting upon a high-level discourse.

Ms. Hontiveros goes as far as saying that Senator Sotto owes an apology to his own mother, sister, and daughter for the unpardonable act of questioning the 11 mothers statistic. Since when has Ms. Hontiveros been appointed as the spokesperson of Senator Sotto's own family? In contrast, I am quite sure that the family of Senator Sotto honors him proudly as he bravely stands to defend the mother Church and what it stands for. He is surely aware that he boldly ranges himself against the feisty Senator Miriam Santiago, who is well-noted to have far more superior academic credentials and bombastic eloquence that is capable of putting anyone to shame. Surely, Senator Sotto pales in eloquence and articulation, but the thing going on for him in this epic clash is that he is armed with the Truth, and that is all that matters.

Should Senator Sotto apologize to all women? On the other hand, these folks throwing dirt on Senator Sotto should apologize to all mankind by insulting our intelligence.
/

Freethinking Fail - impulsive actions

When the issue of the Pajero bishops surfaced, the Freethinkers immediately jumped into a conclusion WITHOUT verifying the story. So much for "Critical Thinking" which they have always been proud of.

As it turned out, it wasn't Pajeros at all but were old vehicles that wer ACTUALLY used for humanitarian purposes.

FAIL: Heresy is the Best Policy: Why Society Should Support Heretics (Part 2 of 2)

FAIL: Heresy is the Best Policy: Why Society Should Support Heretics (Part 2 of 2)

Money quote from the latest freethink fail:

“I think, therefore I am a heretic. I refuse to give up my sacred right to think and I will not surrender my obligation to offend.”
/

Toink !!!

OBLIGATION TO OFFEND?!?

Ok. Everyone has the right to be wrong. However, the right to be wrong does not carry with it the untrammeled right to transgress the rights of of others. If you consider offending others as an "obligation" (oh really?), then use your own money and private resources but NOT GOVERNMENT RESOURCES. And even if you use your own private resources, the offended has the obligation to defend as well. We would rather see the likes of these so-called 'artists" defend their offensive stance in the court of public opinion, as well as in the court of law.

And by the way, do you have any idea what is the meaning of "Sacred"?

/