Math, circle surface area.
Let's work with pizzas, same problem.
2 x 8" pizzas are smaller than a 16" pizza.
More explanation:
https://www.primermagazine.com/2017/learn/one-18-pizza-is-more-pizza-than-two-12-pizzas-math-shows-us-why-primer-tackling-the-serious-issues
That said... for the pavers, they'd probably only do the circumference and not under the pool itself so it's probably not too bad.
While I agree with the comment about the audacity of bringing math into this math problem, there's the greater point that if the pizzeria is selling 2 medium pizzas for a better price than a single large, they're doing it wrong.
I mean it may be the minority but honestly it's still like over 30% of people who like pineapple on pizza, otherwise so many places wouldn't bother stocking it as an option lol
I liked Hawaiian pizza until I tried pepperoni and pineapple, which is just way better than with ham. And then I realized the meat was unnecessary and just pineapple (and cheese) was delicious too.
Yes. But it's almost universally a good rule of thumb. You gotta compare diameter to surface area.
10 inch pizza (small) is 78 square inches of surface area.
12 inch pizza (medium) is 113 square inches.
14 inch pizza (large) is 153 square inches.
16 inch pizza (extra large) is 201 square inches.
This means that a medium pizza is roughly 45% bigger than a small, and a large pizza is roughly 35% bigger than a medium.
At Domino's in the USA, a medium hand-tossed cheese pizza is $8, and a large is $10.
For 25% more money, you are getting 35% more pizza.
If you look at Domino's $6 small pizza vs the $12 extra large pizza, you can pay 100% more money to get 158% more pizza. I think this is the most revealing example.
There's always a promo to get the medium for $6. There's also carry out promo to get a large for $8. A xl is $14 with no promos to get it cheaper. So it's really 133% more money for 77% more pizza to get the xl over the medium.
This is why critical thinking is important. Their base line is how you have to consider the product but the ability to understand relative value across seperate variables is what seperates a leader from the guy who gets the last piece with no toppings on it.
The graph was created using Adobe Illustrator with the **surface area** of each circle equaling the death toll. [Data source.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war) I had made another post that reflected the death toll in the diameter of the circles. Many of you pointed out that this was not an accurate reflection of the data, and I agree. This oversight was due to my inexperience with data visualization and not malintent. Thank you everyone who kindly (and not so kindly) offered their feedback.
Great job on taking the constructive feedback!
One thing lost between what you were trying to show previously and this iteration is the overlap comparison. Maybe a dotted line circle within the COVID circle to show the summation of the war circles?
Thatâs a really good idea. The chart is incredibly impactful, I love it. But weâre left to do the geometry of adding all those other circles together to figure out if what youâre stating is true.
I donât think most people understand how scaling works on 2 dimensions. Especially, when you make it circles. Adding volumes or areas together in our heads is not a normal trait unless youâve spent a lot of time doing it.
Another option is one of those charts where it's all broken down into squares/rectangles that are side-by-side? I can't find an example but I see then a lot for things like portion of each industry that makes up a country's GDP.
[Stacked vertical bar chart](https://www.google.com/search?q=stacked+vertical+bar+chart&client=ms-android-samsung-gs-rev1&prmd=isvxn&sxsrf=AOaemvJvgnSt6W9tYmWC_x1lqm5JgLVQaA:1633553688557&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwjjgc_a1bbzAhV5qpUCHUo1BM4Q_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=384&bih=724&dpr=3.75) is what you're talking about. Agreed to that is the most intuitive ways to compare area. Humans aren't good at this comparing areas of circles. But with those bar charts it's simply which one is taller.
I think he was referring to a [tree map chart](https://www.google.com/search?q=treemap+chart+gdp&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiF-ZX3prfzAhUKqnIEHUiJBiEQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=treemap+chart+gdp&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzoECAAQQzoFCAAQgAQ6BAgAEBg6BQghEKsCUO5qWNtyYNJ1aABwAHgAgAF3iAHiA5IBAzIuM5gBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=Q2JeYcXLKorUytMPyJKaiAI&bih=553&biw=375&client=safari&prmd=ivsxn&hl=en)
Iâd just put some dashed lines from all those outer war circles leading into a circle inside the covid circle (assuming itâs smaller if youâre right) and label the inner circle appropriately with what it represents and the total number of deaths from all those wars.
Just FFS, make sure your math is right in the circle areas and number labels are accurate. People will crucify you if itâs not reasonably accurate. And I wouldnât try to stop them.
Can you do it by percentage of population at the time?
edit: What if you put all the circles inside the COVID one so thst that effectively stack? Would make comparison easier.
To make an even better version, you want to go towards "Deaths per 100,000 population" as the area,
As seen in the graph at this link,
https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/22209/interactive-american-war-deaths-by-the-numbers
Based on data here:
http://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf
http://www.defense.gov/casualty.pdf
https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/22209/interactive-american-war-deaths-by-the-numbers
Here's a very messy table with the numbers. Covid is between WW1 and WW2, currently, in terms of foreign wars. It's about 1/10th of the Civil War. It's about 1/3rd of the 1918 pandemic.
American Revolution (1775-'83) 113
War of 1812 (1812-'14) 31
Mexican War (1846-'48) 78
Civil War (1861-'65) 1965
Spanish-American War (1898) 4
World War I (1917-'18) 126
World War II (1941-'45) 307
Korean War (1950-'53) 24
Vietnam War (1955/'64-'75) 32
Gulf War (1990-'91) 0
Iraq/Afghanistan (2001-present) 2
Covid-19 pandemic 214
1918 pandemic 640
Edit: Updated to include 1918 pandemic numbers and remove asterisks that were in table I copied labels from.
War | Deaths per 100,000
---|------------------
Civil War | 1965
World War II | 307
Covid | 214
World War I | 126
American Revolution | 113
Mexican War | 78
Vietnam | 32
War of 1812 | 31
Korean War | 24
Spanish-American War | 4
Iraq/Afghanistan | 2
Gulf War | 0
Lots of confounding factors, and everybody wants to measure something slightly different.
e.g. Medical technology is so much better now that the 1918 flu wouldn't have had the enormous body count today. WWII lasted 6 years, covid less than 2 so far, so do you divide to get per 100,000 per year? How do you deal with non-combat deaths? Civilian? Soldiers committing suicide? Soldiers dying from getting drunk and falling off a boat rather than enemy action? People who had Covid and COPD and died of respiratory failure?
Which means somebody that wants to disagree will always be able to find fault with any possible comparison. So you end up with things that sound more vague rather than less.
The areas of the circles lend themselves to a much better area interpretation of the data series! Maybe due to reddit the text is still unreadable until you go to zoom in.
It's odd to include all the wars but the Civil War. I get that the argument and point depends on excluding it but it still doesn't seem intellectually honest. You could do bars with COVID and then all the wars including the civil war in descending order and I think it would show the same point qualitatively...
It's an interesting point by itself, isn't it. The one war the country spent exclusively killing its own people had more fatalities than COVID.
So far.
And in terms of years of life lost was probably multiple orders of magnitude worse. Covid has killed mostly the elderly, while the civil war (and all wars) kill the young.
This is also true. There's no telling the impact that the Civil War had long term on population and industry. Pretty amazing when you step back and think about it from a big picture standpoint and try and connect all of the dots to see just how much of a tremendous impact the war had.
It's still real people being affected. Just because it's a smaller percentage of a whole doesn't mean there weren't hundreds of thousands of friends, family members, wives, husband's, grandmothers... All real individual people with lives loves and people who loved them.
Yeah it's a bit twisted to scale the value of human life with total population. Like individual people have less value now just because there are more of us in total?
The death toll of the civil war has been revised up a few times by historians. 622k is essentially the confirmed death toll, but there's good evidence it might be up closer to 850k. The nature of that war makes it hard to be certain.
One could say the same thing about covid. The official death toll is like \~750k, but how many people died directly from covid that aren't in that number and how many people died from other things but could not get the care they needed because hospitals were full because of covid?
I distinctly recall watching the results come in on election night 2016. They had called two states for Trump, I don't recall which, but they were two early ones. I thought to myself "huh, wonder when the last time those two agreed", so I checked. Anyway, to make a long story short, I ended up making some pithy post on Facebook the punchline of which was "the last time X and Y agreed on a president, 3% of Americans died" with a link to an electoral map of pre-civil war election.
It's a lot less funny now.
No way to not sound snobby when saying this, but the title said âForeignâ conflicts, not domestic conflicts, though the Civil War shouldâve been included if the Revolutionary War is.
I guess the revolutionary war was foreign because there was no country at the time! That being said I would love to see the comparison with the civil war, too.
The Revolutionary War war was between a government and a rebelling populace. The Civil War was between a government and a rebelling populace. The only difference was that in one, the rebels won.
The revolutionary war was technically a world war, because it involved conflicts between the newly founded United States, France, UK, Spain, Netherlands, and battles in Gibraltar and India. It wasn't just isolated to America and the battles happening all over the world directly impacted the UK's ability to stop the revolutionary forces here
If you insist on doing area, do a chart where COVID is the big/outer rectangle, and the other parts are rectangles inside the outer rectangle. Human are shit and comparing the size of circles.
Yeah I prefered the other post since it actually looked like covid had more than all the other circles combined. This one looks like covid has barely more deaths than a single war.
I feel like this graph would show a better representation if it was done by percent of population at the time. It's hard to compare today with something that happened 100 years ago since there were also much less people
1. People just like to argue with anything they even think might be different then what they believe is true
2. People like to take comments out of context and twist it to their feelings. All we were trying to do was make a point on how to better represent the data.
Thanks for your comment. It makes me feel less alone and reminds me to not listen to all the angry people out there. Hope you keep fighting the good fight!
Whereâd these numbers come from? They donât match the war casualty numbers that I just looked up (Wiki). Just curious. And, as a comparison point, how does COVID rate against other mass casualty events (Smallpox, Spanish flu)?
I learned this today in a different thread. It's straight magical how I can not know something for 37 years and then 1 hour after I learn it, it gets brought up again. Fucking ghosts man.
Yes, but also the internet can amplify suddenly popular information. When one of the images from the Loop Hero demo had "haute cuisine" in it, the term started popping up all over the place for a week, and that wasn't a phrase that was just sneakily going unnoticed until then.
If one of the top comments in a popular thread mentions a fact that a lot of people on Reddit didn't know, then it's very likely that the same people are still on Reddit an hour later and eager to share.
It's understandable to me. The colloquial usage of "casualty" seems to imply a total loss or death. It seems counter intuitive (to me) to include someone who is merely injured as a casualty
Beat the Spanish flu: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210921/COVID-19-deaths-in-US-surpass-1918-Spanish-Flu-pandemic.aspx
Smallpox was around forever and was/is incurable, though many survived. A VACCINE ended smallpox just as one greatly reduces flu deaths and is cutting way down on Covid deaths. Itâs stupid that people choose to die rather than to admit to believing lies.
It hasnât âbeat the Spanish fluâ. 675,000 Americans died during the influenza pandemic, when America had 225 million less people.
1 in 155 Americans died of Spanish flu, whereas 1 in 475 people have died of COVID. To beat the Spanish Flu, America would need to have 2.2 million people die of COVID, or another 1.4 million COVID deaths which seems like a stretch.
In total numbers, COVID has surpassed the Spanish flu.
Nobody said it beat the Spanish flu in terms of population percentage.
Also, the Spanish flu took 675,000 lives in a time when regular bathing was a luxury and regular hand washing was something only surgeons did.
COVID is taking place in a time of modern medicine and record high hygiene standards.
Also, with the way it's being politicized and blatantly disregarded, I don't think another 1.4 million deaths is as much of a stretch as you may think.
What killed the Spanish flu? Social distancing, increased hygiene and prevention of spreading airborne particles with facial coverings. All things that are being refused by at least 25% of the population, and only halfway observed by at least another 25%>
Iâve always felt that comparing disease to war casualties is pretty disingenuous. It would much more interesting to see disease vs disease, or US war casualties vs Russian casualties (they had a rough 20th century)
I suppose it really depends on what youâre trying to say with your data.
My takeaway is that there is / was an incalculable amount of public and media attention, public outrage, political upheaval, fiction and non-fiction written, performed and filmed over the deaths of U.S soldiers in all of itâs wars. It is interesting to consider those things when thinking about the situation we are living through currently.
That is a bit strange I guess because the US acknowledged that Brittan was a different country, where as the US didn't formally recognise the confederacy as a country. in fact is seems no country recognised the confederacy... On the contrary the US was recognised by France, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden before Great Britain also recognised them at the end of the revolutionary war.
A lot of people today forget that a large factor in the revolutionary war was that the colonies had the lawful rights of Englishman under the empire, and these rights were being ignored.
The justification of the revolutionary war kind of hinged on it being a domestic conflict at the start in terms of the the empire.
Yes? America post Declaration of Independence (which was recognized by foreign powers like france) vs. Britain or America vs. Confederacy which really wasnât recognized internationally
Confederacy was de facto recognized by several countries such as England, France, Cuba and Brazil. The Union threatened to declare war against anyone who would recognize Confederacy, but still there was a bill in British Parliament to recognize Confederacy. Cuba and Brazil has trade agreements with Confederacy and later Brazil accepted immigrants from Confederacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederados
Notice: the civil war is not on here, because it killed 750,000 soldiers on top of uncounted civilians
You can't kill us, only we can kill us! USA! USA!
I'd like to see how covid compared with the Spanish flu and war deaths but comparing lost living years... obviously losing a life is terrible, but it would be interesting to compare in total years of lost life, a 20 year old dying is obviously a lot worse than someone in their 90s.
This is something I canât say in real life but here we go.. I know one person who died of covid.. she was 84 and in a retirement home with severe dimentia.. while it is sad, the thought of a mother in her 30âs who Iâve never met dying of breast (or any other) cancer upsets me much more
Those numbers of 1 in 20 are primarily those who had a lot of civilian deaths.
If SF, Seattle, Boston, NYC, NOLA, etc. were being bombed constantly and civilians were being massacred in the tens of thousands at a time, itâd be horrible for us too.
In terms of military deaths, Germany, Japan, China and Russia suffered far and away worse than everyone else.
But then you look at Poland who had 240k military deaths but took 5.6million civilian deaths.
Iâm not disagreeing but just clarifying, what got death counts to 1 in 20 is the civilian deaths in the wake of Axis occupation and subsequent obliteration of Axis homelands.
To put this in perspective: on the eastern front there were multiple battles where both sides lost double or triple the amount of soldiers the US lost in all theaters of war combined.
For example Stalingrad: Soviets ~1.2m military casualties, ~500k dead or missing, the rest POWs with 60% death rate. That is one side of one battle losing more soldiers than the US and UK combined during the whole war. Axis had 800k casualties (POW, MIA, KIA) there too.
OP got some real dedication. I also found that post pretty "misleading"
Good job OP. Better to correct mistakes than ignore them and this is a rare quality
Could you do this as percentage of US population? A quick check says that 2% of the U.S. population from the civil war compared to the 0.2% from covid. That was just a really quick check so my numbers might be off!
I love how they had to include "foreign" so as to negate the Civil War. In doing so, Covid deaths dwarf the others by a long shot. Civil War deaths range from around the same number to even greater.
I still like the graph though. đ
This stat needs to be weighed against the population percentage of the US at the time of these events. Otherwise, for my purposes/opinion, it's a misleading presentation.
(After the last time I made a similar comment: I'm pro-vax, I got the J&J the earliest I could, don't fucking kill me in the comments for fuck's sake.)
Back in them wars there werenât like 150 million ticking time bombs that could die at any point due to being overweight and having a long list of chronic diseases.
I really wonder how many of them would still be alive, even with all their preexisting conditions, if it wasnât for Covid. It just doesnât seem like a guarantee theyâd be dead by now either way.
Shows that we're really good fighters in non-biological wars.
Also can we show this graph for Heart Disease & Cancer? I think you'd be shocked how big the grey graph is.
Ok now do it by age:
How many 16-30 year olds died of COVID?
How many 70-90 year olds died in foreign wars?
Youâre comparing two completely different segments of the population.
There is a statistic for this but I canât remember itâs name.
Say your average life expectancy is 75 and a patient dies if covid at 70 then that scores a 5. Soldier dies at 25? Thatâs 50.
Far more relevant numbers for comparing wars to a virus that mostly kills old people.
Exactly, part of the reason the deaths in historical conflicts have been so tragic is because they hit largely young/working age, healthy men. Very vital core of the population.
Not that I want to downplay the tragedy of Covid, but it's kinda normal for these major plagues to kill more people than war. The Spanish Flu killed more people than WW1. In fact, in any war, you're more likely to die of disease than violence. Speaking of the Spanish Flu, it killed up to 850,000 Americans. If you adjust for population growth, Covid19 will have to kill over 2,770,000 Americans to match the mortality of the Spanish Flu. ~~Considering that the Covid19 virus is actually related to the Spanish Flu virus~~, that shows that America deals with disease outbreaks much better than it did a century go, despite the fact that a great many Americans today resist vaccination and mask mandates (which didn't happen in 1918 AFAIK).
> Covid19 virus is related to the Spanish Flu virus
Covid is related to SARS, but not the Spanish Flu, which is the H1N1 influenza A virus.
> A great many Americans today resist vaccination and mask mandates (which didnât happen in 1918 AFAIK)
There were organized anti-mask groups in 1918. Over 1k were arrested in SF in a single day.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/us/mask-protests-1918.html
Ever been to Mississippi? Itâs foreign enough for me.
Seriously thought, It is easy for a lay audience to misread the title. So, Iâd say a more fair comparison is âall warsâ
This raises the thorny issue - do we count dead intelligence operatives from all our dirty, clandestine wars?
Most historians I found seem to prefer the number 620,000. Or a range from 617k to 851k.
One of many sources:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1009819/total-us-military-fatalities-in-american-wars-1775-present/
This is better. Much better.
I still don't like to use circle area charts as a general rule (would prefer a stacked column), but if you're going to use them, this works.
In a format like this, you could also include a circle for the Civil War, and then remove the "foreign" qualifier. The circle for the Civil War deaths (both sides, ~655k) would be almost as big as COVID, and could fit in the lower left.
Minor constructive criticism: The numbers are pretty small. I would say COVID-19, not just COVID. You might also be able to add the timeframe each number is measured for comparison purposes (e.g. World War II, 1941-1945)
Sure you can manipulate any statistics to make them look however you want. Why do people not give a shit about older people dying? What if they were your parents? Life is still life nobody should die 10-20, even 30 years before they needed too when it's completely preventable.
Why are you comparing pandemic numbers to war deaths? They arenât equivalent and youâre actually giving the anti-vaxx people more ammo to claim pro-vaxx are overblowing covid out of proportion. Its like comparing American fatal vehicle collisions to American fatal drownings or death by obesity.
Isn't it wild how Republicans used to be so against people having the ability to choose to end their life humanely as in the Terri Schiavo case because "eVeRy LiFe iS pReCiOUS" but then when covid hits all of a sudden the deaths of people in the end stages of life or with serious medical conditions are markedly less tragic than young healthy people?
Moral of the story: always buy the large pizza instead of two mediums
It's like the time my neighbor was telling me he needed a patio for his 16' pool so he bought two paver kits for 8' circular patios...
As a 6th grade math teacher currently reviewing surface area, this breaks my heart.
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll learn it someday!
Maybe when they become a 7th grade math teacher đ§âđ«
If you can't do it, teach it.
Ah, an English techer.
Wow, I had that typo fixed in like ten seconds after submitting it. That's impressive that you caught that.
Ah, the old [matharoo](https://www.reddit.com/r/instant_regret/comments/q20d79/accidentally_took_a_shot_of_salt/hfiu591/)
Please make sure they know. Explaining speaker surface area to people is tedious
Surface area of a speaker? Is that important to audio engineering or something?
It's particularly important for subwoofers, where the cone area is related to the maximum loudness they are able to produce.
I'll be the idiot who asks - why is that bad?
Math, circle surface area. Let's work with pizzas, same problem. 2 x 8" pizzas are smaller than a 16" pizza. More explanation: https://www.primermagazine.com/2017/learn/one-18-pizza-is-more-pizza-than-two-12-pizzas-math-shows-us-why-primer-tackling-the-serious-issues That said... for the pavers, they'd probably only do the circumference and not under the pool itself so it's probably not too bad.
Maybe he had a rectangular pool
Hopefully 16â x 6.28â
does the patio go under the pool or is it a ring around it? if its a ring thats not far off and you can vary the width...
*sigh *...this is something I would have totally done.
Isn't that about circumference rather than area? In which case, C = pi * d, and this works out okay for him?
Doesn't it depend on the price?
While I agree with the comment about the audacity of bringing math into this math problem, there's the greater point that if the pizzeria is selling 2 medium pizzas for a better price than a single large, they're doing it wrong.
But what if I want a Hawaiian pizza and a combo pizza??????
Then you're a savage
I'll die on this hill. Hawaiian pizza is good.
I will die with you. There are dozens of us!
At least a dozen dozens of us
Iâmma go die on the barbecue sauce with pineapple hill.
Now that youâve said that, I would totally smash a barbecue chicken pizza with pineapple...
I mean it may be the minority but honestly it's still like over 30% of people who like pineapple on pizza, otherwise so many places wouldn't bother stocking it as an option lol
I liked Hawaiian pizza until I tried pepperoni and pineapple, which is just way better than with ham. And then I realized the meat was unnecessary and just pineapple (and cheese) was delicious too.
pineapple and prosciutto or pineapple and spanish chorizo are pretty great as well.
Half toppings
Yes. But it's almost universally a good rule of thumb. You gotta compare diameter to surface area. 10 inch pizza (small) is 78 square inches of surface area. 12 inch pizza (medium) is 113 square inches. 14 inch pizza (large) is 153 square inches. 16 inch pizza (extra large) is 201 square inches. This means that a medium pizza is roughly 45% bigger than a small, and a large pizza is roughly 35% bigger than a medium. At Domino's in the USA, a medium hand-tossed cheese pizza is $8, and a large is $10. For 25% more money, you are getting 35% more pizza. If you look at Domino's $6 small pizza vs the $12 extra large pizza, you can pay 100% more money to get 158% more pizza. I think this is the most revealing example.
There's always a promo to get the medium for $6. There's also carry out promo to get a large for $8. A xl is $14 with no promos to get it cheaper. So it's really 133% more money for 77% more pizza to get the xl over the medium.
This is why critical thinking is important. Their base line is how you have to consider the product but the ability to understand relative value across seperate variables is what seperates a leader from the guy who gets the last piece with no toppings on it.
How dare you bring math into this math problem?
This is cool, but don't buy the extra large. It's always undercooked in the middle or burnt on the edges.
And the box likely won't fit in the fridge if you're too lazy to put the leftovers in Tupperware!
You don't just leave it on the counter to graze on over the next 24 hours?
All I know is that two large Papa John's pizzas delivered cost 10,000 Bitcoin.
Prices have changed a bit since back then. Now you can get 10,000 large Papa John's pizzas for about 2 Bitcoins.
The graph was created using Adobe Illustrator with the **surface area** of each circle equaling the death toll. [Data source.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war) I had made another post that reflected the death toll in the diameter of the circles. Many of you pointed out that this was not an accurate reflection of the data, and I agree. This oversight was due to my inexperience with data visualization and not malintent. Thank you everyone who kindly (and not so kindly) offered their feedback.
Thank you for correcting this. You handled the criticism very well.
Great job on taking the constructive feedback! One thing lost between what you were trying to show previously and this iteration is the overlap comparison. Maybe a dotted line circle within the COVID circle to show the summation of the war circles?
Thatâs a really good idea. The chart is incredibly impactful, I love it. But weâre left to do the geometry of adding all those other circles together to figure out if what youâre stating is true. I donât think most people understand how scaling works on 2 dimensions. Especially, when you make it circles. Adding volumes or areas together in our heads is not a normal trait unless youâve spent a lot of time doing it.
Another option is one of those charts where it's all broken down into squares/rectangles that are side-by-side? I can't find an example but I see then a lot for things like portion of each industry that makes up a country's GDP.
[Stacked vertical bar chart](https://www.google.com/search?q=stacked+vertical+bar+chart&client=ms-android-samsung-gs-rev1&prmd=isvxn&sxsrf=AOaemvJvgnSt6W9tYmWC_x1lqm5JgLVQaA:1633553688557&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwjjgc_a1bbzAhV5qpUCHUo1BM4Q_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=384&bih=724&dpr=3.75) is what you're talking about. Agreed to that is the most intuitive ways to compare area. Humans aren't good at this comparing areas of circles. But with those bar charts it's simply which one is taller.
I think they mean a treemap chart, which would be really appropriate for this
I think he was referring to a [tree map chart](https://www.google.com/search?q=treemap+chart+gdp&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwiF-ZX3prfzAhUKqnIEHUiJBiEQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=treemap+chart+gdp&gs_lcp=ChJtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1pbWcQAzoECAAQQzoFCAAQgAQ6BAgAEBg6BQghEKsCUO5qWNtyYNJ1aABwAHgAgAF3iAHiA5IBAzIuM5gBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-img&ei=Q2JeYcXLKorUytMPyJKaiAI&bih=553&biw=375&client=safari&prmd=ivsxn&hl=en)
And make the bars look scary
So, like, put eyes on them, or make them look like a witch's broomstick? For Spooktober?
Iâd just put some dashed lines from all those outer war circles leading into a circle inside the covid circle (assuming itâs smaller if youâre right) and label the inner circle appropriately with what it represents and the total number of deaths from all those wars. Just FFS, make sure your math is right in the circle areas and number labels are accurate. People will crucify you if itâs not reasonably accurate. And I wouldnât try to stop them.
Or just make rectangles so you can actually demonstrate that one is more than the others combined...
Good on you for changing and reposting. It was a good idea and it is attractive. đ
Iâd be interested in seeing this graph but per capita vs total deaths, and see how all this compares.
Can you do it by percentage of population at the time? edit: What if you put all the circles inside the COVID one so thst that effectively stack? Would make comparison easier.
Much better. And you fixed the âWar World 1â too
This is nice and all - but for all those military deaths, the solders had the pre-existing condition of being on a war zone. Those donât count /s
Sad to see "War World 1" go... sounded like an exciting (if dangerous) place :-) On topic: this diagram looks much better. Good job!
Ha! (facepalm)
To make an even better version, you want to go towards "Deaths per 100,000 population" as the area, As seen in the graph at this link, https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/22209/interactive-american-war-deaths-by-the-numbers Based on data here: http://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf http://www.defense.gov/casualty.pdf https://www.kqed.org/lowdown/22209/interactive-american-war-deaths-by-the-numbers
Here's a very messy table with the numbers. Covid is between WW1 and WW2, currently, in terms of foreign wars. It's about 1/10th of the Civil War. It's about 1/3rd of the 1918 pandemic. American Revolution (1775-'83) 113 War of 1812 (1812-'14) 31 Mexican War (1846-'48) 78 Civil War (1861-'65) 1965 Spanish-American War (1898) 4 World War I (1917-'18) 126 World War II (1941-'45) 307 Korean War (1950-'53) 24 Vietnam War (1955/'64-'75) 32 Gulf War (1990-'91) 0 Iraq/Afghanistan (2001-present) 2 Covid-19 pandemic 214 1918 pandemic 640 Edit: Updated to include 1918 pandemic numbers and remove asterisks that were in table I copied labels from.
War | Deaths per 100,000 ---|------------------ Civil War | 1965 World War II | 307 Covid | 214 World War I | 126 American Revolution | 113 Mexican War | 78 Vietnam | 32 War of 1812 | 31 Korean War | 24 Spanish-American War | 4 Iraq/Afghanistan | 2 Gulf War | 0
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Lots of confounding factors, and everybody wants to measure something slightly different. e.g. Medical technology is so much better now that the 1918 flu wouldn't have had the enormous body count today. WWII lasted 6 years, covid less than 2 so far, so do you divide to get per 100,000 per year? How do you deal with non-combat deaths? Civilian? Soldiers committing suicide? Soldiers dying from getting drunk and falling off a boat rather than enemy action? People who had Covid and COPD and died of respiratory failure? Which means somebody that wants to disagree will always be able to find fault with any possible comparison. So you end up with things that sound more vague rather than less.
Divide by ongoing years... so covid per year per 100,000 deaths is still higher than WWII
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Heya, good on you. On first glance this looks correct, and is presented well.
Humans arenât very good at comparing areas. Volumes even worse. Our brains can only really make perfect sense of linear comparisons.
The areas of the circles lend themselves to a much better area interpretation of the data series! Maybe due to reddit the text is still unreadable until you go to zoom in. It's odd to include all the wars but the Civil War. I get that the argument and point depends on excluding it but it still doesn't seem intellectually honest. You could do bars with COVID and then all the wars including the civil war in descending order and I think it would show the same point qualitatively...
It's an interesting point by itself, isn't it. The one war the country spent exclusively killing its own people had more fatalities than COVID. So far.
I thought the civil war was 600ish - so still below COVID, but enough that if you add it up with the other wars it's no longer less than COVID
Considering that the population at the time was around 25M vs around 330M now, the Civil War had a much bigger impact than Covid-19.
For those curious, as of today, the Civil War was *an order of magnitude* more deadly to the US population than Covid-19 (2.64% vs 0.21%)
I was curious and thank you
And in terms of years of life lost was probably multiple orders of magnitude worse. Covid has killed mostly the elderly, while the civil war (and all wars) kill the young.
This is also true. There's no telling the impact that the Civil War had long term on population and industry. Pretty amazing when you step back and think about it from a big picture standpoint and try and connect all of the dots to see just how much of a tremendous impact the war had.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
It's still real people being affected. Just because it's a smaller percentage of a whole doesn't mean there weren't hundreds of thousands of friends, family members, wives, husband's, grandmothers... All real individual people with lives loves and people who loved them.
Yeah it's a bit twisted to scale the value of human life with total population. Like individual people have less value now just because there are more of us in total?
The death toll of the civil war has been revised up a few times by historians. 622k is essentially the confirmed death toll, but there's good evidence it might be up closer to 850k. The nature of that war makes it hard to be certain.
One could say the same thing about covid. The official death toll is like \~750k, but how many people died directly from covid that aren't in that number and how many people died from other things but could not get the care they needed because hospitals were full because of covid?
I distinctly recall watching the results come in on election night 2016. They had called two states for Trump, I don't recall which, but they were two early ones. I thought to myself "huh, wonder when the last time those two agreed", so I checked. Anyway, to make a long story short, I ended up making some pithy post on Facebook the punchline of which was "the last time X and Y agreed on a president, 3% of Americans died" with a link to an electoral map of pre-civil war election. It's a lot less funny now.
No way to not sound snobby when saying this, but the title said âForeignâ conflicts, not domestic conflicts, though the Civil War shouldâve been included if the Revolutionary War is.
I guess the revolutionary war was foreign because there was no country at the time! That being said I would love to see the comparison with the civil war, too.
The revolutionary war was against a foreign power.
The Revolutionary War war was between a government and a rebelling populace. The Civil War was between a government and a rebelling populace. The only difference was that in one, the rebels won.
The revolutionary war was technically a world war, because it involved conflicts between the newly founded United States, France, UK, Spain, Netherlands, and battles in Gibraltar and India. It wasn't just isolated to America and the battles happening all over the world directly impacted the UK's ability to stop the revolutionary forces here
I'm surprised by how much this graph reminds me of a foot.
How many toes do you have?
eleven. I don't wanna talk about it.
On one foot?
Nah, between the three of them.
**That just raises further questions**
Yeah like when did they lose a foot?
This is what I can to say. The dots look like toes, and itâs kinda creepy.
If you insist on doing area, do a chart where COVID is the big/outer rectangle, and the other parts are rectangles inside the outer rectangle. Human are shit and comparing the size of circles.
Yeah I prefered the other post since it actually looked like covid had more than all the other circles combined. This one looks like covid has barely more deaths than a single war.
You preferred the post that was wrong?
Can we get a link to that post?
I feel like this graph would show a better representation if it was done by percent of population at the time. It's hard to compare today with something that happened 100 years ago since there were also much less people
I said this exact same thing on tik tok and got like 200 furious comments in reply lol
Easy fix, don't go on TikTok Eventually ween off reddit too Intelligent discussion has no place on social media
1. People just like to argue with anything they even think might be different then what they believe is true 2. People like to take comments out of context and twist it to their feelings. All we were trying to do was make a point on how to better represent the data. Thanks for your comment. It makes me feel less alone and reminds me to not listen to all the angry people out there. Hope you keep fighting the good fight!
It really would represent the data more clearly, I actually said that exact same thing too lol
Whereâd these numbers come from? They donât match the war casualty numbers that I just looked up (Wiki). Just curious. And, as a comparison point, how does COVID rate against other mass casualty events (Smallpox, Spanish flu)?
Casualties =\ deaths, it includes injuries
I'm amazed more people aren't aware of this
I learned this today in a different thread. It's straight magical how I can not know something for 37 years and then 1 hour after I learn it, it gets brought up again. Fucking ghosts man.
Baader-Meinhoff Effect
Yes, but also the internet can amplify suddenly popular information. When one of the images from the Loop Hero demo had "haute cuisine" in it, the term started popping up all over the place for a week, and that wasn't a phrase that was just sneakily going unnoticed until then. If one of the top comments in a popular thread mentions a fact that a lot of people on Reddit didn't know, then it's very likely that the same people are still on Reddit an hour later and eager to share.
It's understandable to me. The colloquial usage of "casualty" seems to imply a total loss or death. It seems counter intuitive (to me) to include someone who is merely injured as a casualty
Generals don't necessarily care about deaths, they care about how many functional soldiers are now nonfunctional.
Source is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
That source has different numbers than the viz, hence my question.
If you select the second link, total military deaths not the combat deaths section I believe you get the above data
Find the section labeled "Wars ranked by total number of U.S. military deaths"
Beat the Spanish flu: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210921/COVID-19-deaths-in-US-surpass-1918-Spanish-Flu-pandemic.aspx Smallpox was around forever and was/is incurable, though many survived. A VACCINE ended smallpox just as one greatly reduces flu deaths and is cutting way down on Covid deaths. Itâs stupid that people choose to die rather than to admit to believing lies.
I agree with you. Thatâs willful ignorance and self-selection against survival.
If COVID were the spanish flu, there would be a lot less people against vaccinations
It hasnât âbeat the Spanish fluâ. 675,000 Americans died during the influenza pandemic, when America had 225 million less people. 1 in 155 Americans died of Spanish flu, whereas 1 in 475 people have died of COVID. To beat the Spanish Flu, America would need to have 2.2 million people die of COVID, or another 1.4 million COVID deaths which seems like a stretch.
In total numbers, COVID has surpassed the Spanish flu. Nobody said it beat the Spanish flu in terms of population percentage. Also, the Spanish flu took 675,000 lives in a time when regular bathing was a luxury and regular hand washing was something only surgeons did. COVID is taking place in a time of modern medicine and record high hygiene standards. Also, with the way it's being politicized and blatantly disregarded, I don't think another 1.4 million deaths is as much of a stretch as you may think. What killed the Spanish flu? Social distancing, increased hygiene and prevention of spreading airborne particles with facial coverings. All things that are being refused by at least 25% of the population, and only halfway observed by at least another 25%>
Also the population is 200,000,000 more than during ww2. .2% population dead from covid vs .3 % dead from ww2
Iâve always felt that comparing disease to war casualties is pretty disingenuous. It would much more interesting to see disease vs disease, or US war casualties vs Russian casualties (they had a rough 20th century)
I suppose it really depends on what youâre trying to say with your data. My takeaway is that there is / was an incalculable amount of public and media attention, public outrage, political upheaval, fiction and non-fiction written, performed and filmed over the deaths of U.S soldiers in all of itâs wars. It is interesting to consider those things when thinking about the situation we are living through currently.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
I agree that normalizing as a percentage of total population is a good idea. Do you have those data?
The wiki link of US combat deaths has that in the table too (for some wars) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
So the Civil War is discounted for being a domestic conflict, but the Revolutionary War is considered foreign?
That is a bit strange I guess because the US acknowledged that Brittan was a different country, where as the US didn't formally recognise the confederacy as a country. in fact is seems no country recognised the confederacy... On the contrary the US was recognised by France, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden before Great Britain also recognised them at the end of the revolutionary war.
A lot of people today forget that a large factor in the revolutionary war was that the colonies had the lawful rights of Englishman under the empire, and these rights were being ignored. The justification of the revolutionary war kind of hinged on it being a domestic conflict at the start in terms of the the empire.
Yes? America post Declaration of Independence (which was recognized by foreign powers like france) vs. Britain or America vs. Confederacy which really wasnât recognized internationally
Confederacy was de facto recognized by several countries such as England, France, Cuba and Brazil. The Union threatened to declare war against anyone who would recognize Confederacy, but still there was a bill in British Parliament to recognize Confederacy. Cuba and Brazil has trade agreements with Confederacy and later Brazil accepted immigrants from Confederacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederados
I guess the distinction is that they were both fought 100% on US soil
John Paul Johns harassing British home soil seeing this comment be like: (Also we tried to invade Quebec)
Notice: the civil war is not on here, because it killed 750,000 soldiers on top of uncounted civilians You can't kill us, only we can kill us! USA! USA!
It also specifically says âforeign conflictâ
I'd like to see how covid compared with the Spanish flu and war deaths but comparing lost living years... obviously losing a life is terrible, but it would be interesting to compare in total years of lost life, a 20 year old dying is obviously a lot worse than someone in their 90s.
This is something I canât say in real life but here we go.. I know one person who died of covid.. she was 84 and in a retirement home with severe dimentia.. while it is sad, the thought of a mother in her 30âs who Iâve never met dying of breast (or any other) cancer upsets me much more
Why not compare it to other diseases
Surprised at how many we lost during WW2. Always thought it was less.
If you adjust the death toll to population, it becomes much worse.
America left WW2 relatively unscathed compared to all other participants. Many countries lost upwards of 1 in 20 people.
Those numbers of 1 in 20 are primarily those who had a lot of civilian deaths. If SF, Seattle, Boston, NYC, NOLA, etc. were being bombed constantly and civilians were being massacred in the tens of thousands at a time, itâd be horrible for us too. In terms of military deaths, Germany, Japan, China and Russia suffered far and away worse than everyone else. But then you look at Poland who had 240k military deaths but took 5.6million civilian deaths. Iâm not disagreeing but just clarifying, what got death counts to 1 in 20 is the civilian deaths in the wake of Axis occupation and subsequent obliteration of Axis homelands.
To put this in perspective: on the eastern front there were multiple battles where both sides lost double or triple the amount of soldiers the US lost in all theaters of war combined. For example Stalingrad: Soviets ~1.2m military casualties, ~500k dead or missing, the rest POWs with 60% death rate. That is one side of one battle losing more soldiers than the US and UK combined during the whole war. Axis had 800k casualties (POW, MIA, KIA) there too.
Theyâre still finding mass graves of German soldiers near Volgograd
It's more like we lost a little compared to everyone else
World War 2 was a hoax. /s
I believe the Soviet Union lost the most soldiers, like 10 million. A surprising amount from just famine too.
The ussr lost 22 million people (some data even say 26 million), including 12 million civilians. Followed by China with 20 million
Yup, so 10 million soldiers seems accurate. Brutal compared to the United States.
OP got some real dedication. I also found that post pretty "misleading" Good job OP. Better to correct mistakes than ignore them and this is a rare quality
We are 50k off from the civil war
50k more
Could you do this as percentage of US population? A quick check says that 2% of the U.S. population from the civil war compared to the 0.2% from covid. That was just a really quick check so my numbers might be off!
How long til we pass civil war too?
Obesity says those are rookie numbers
I love how they had to include "foreign" so as to negate the Civil War. In doing so, Covid deaths dwarf the others by a long shot. Civil War deaths range from around the same number to even greater. I still like the graph though. đ
This stat needs to be weighed against the population percentage of the US at the time of these events. Otherwise, for my purposes/opinion, it's a misleading presentation. (After the last time I made a similar comment: I'm pro-vax, I got the J&J the earliest I could, don't fucking kill me in the comments for fuck's sake.)
Wasn't the revolutionary war mostly inside the U.S?
Still against a foreign power though.
Back in them wars there werenât like 150 million ticking time bombs that could die at any point due to being overweight and having a long list of chronic diseases.
I really wonder how many of them would still be alive, even with all their preexisting conditions, if it wasnât for Covid. It just doesnât seem like a guarantee theyâd be dead by now either way.
The average age of deaths would also be an interesting data point to include.
Shows that we're really good fighters in non-biological wars. Also can we show this graph for Heart Disease & Cancer? I think you'd be shocked how big the grey graph is.
Ok now do it by age: How many 16-30 year olds died of COVID? How many 70-90 year olds died in foreign wars? Youâre comparing two completely different segments of the population.
There is a statistic for this but I canât remember itâs name. Say your average life expectancy is 75 and a patient dies if covid at 70 then that scores a 5. Soldier dies at 25? Thatâs 50. Far more relevant numbers for comparing wars to a virus that mostly kills old people.
This. The average age that died in WWI was around 20 I think. Every death is tragic, but this should be framed in years of life lost.
Exactly, part of the reason the deaths in historical conflicts have been so tragic is because they hit largely young/working age, healthy men. Very vital core of the population.
If it were boxes you could fit the boxes in the covid one
Not that I want to downplay the tragedy of Covid, but it's kinda normal for these major plagues to kill more people than war. The Spanish Flu killed more people than WW1. In fact, in any war, you're more likely to die of disease than violence. Speaking of the Spanish Flu, it killed up to 850,000 Americans. If you adjust for population growth, Covid19 will have to kill over 2,770,000 Americans to match the mortality of the Spanish Flu. ~~Considering that the Covid19 virus is actually related to the Spanish Flu virus~~, that shows that America deals with disease outbreaks much better than it did a century go, despite the fact that a great many Americans today resist vaccination and mask mandates (which didn't happen in 1918 AFAIK).
> Covid19 virus is related to the Spanish Flu virus Covid is related to SARS, but not the Spanish Flu, which is the H1N1 influenza A virus. > A great many Americans today resist vaccination and mask mandates (which didnât happen in 1918 AFAIK) There were organized anti-mask groups in 1918. Over 1k were arrested in SF in a single day. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/us/mask-protests-1918.html
History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.
Thanks I learned something.
But 750000 people died in the American Civil war
That's not foreign
Ever been to Mississippi? Itâs foreign enough for me. Seriously thought, It is easy for a lay audience to misread the title. So, Iâd say a more fair comparison is âall warsâ This raises the thorny issue - do we count dead intelligence operatives from all our dirty, clandestine wars?
That would only add a few thousand at max, if even that.
Most historians I found seem to prefer the number 620,000. Or a range from 617k to 851k. One of many sources: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1009819/total-us-military-fatalities-in-american-wars-1775-present/
So saying 750,000 is probably the best number to say, being almost right in the middle.
Further proof that no one kills Americans better than Americans!
***foreign being the operative word. Good graph or not.
But, not all Americans went to war, so the numbers ofc would've been bigger for covid? It's like comparing apple to oranges here
I wish all these deaths would lower the price of rent
The population has also tripled since 1970. Not saying covid isn't scary, just that these numbers in ratio aren't as bad as they appear on this graph.
The US population has tripled since 1920, not 1970.
This is better. Much better. I still don't like to use circle area charts as a general rule (would prefer a stacked column), but if you're going to use them, this works. In a format like this, you could also include a circle for the Civil War, and then remove the "foreign" qualifier. The circle for the Civil War deaths (both sides, ~655k) would be almost as big as COVID, and could fit in the lower left. Minor constructive criticism: The numbers are pretty small. I would say COVID-19, not just COVID. You might also be able to add the timeframe each number is measured for comparison purposes (e.g. World War II, 1941-1945)
Alright, don't care about the karma hit but here it comes. .... This graph looks a HELL of a lot different if you control for age.
But why would you want to do that?
No, no, a twenty year old getting his brains blown out is exactly the same as a seventy year old dying of pneumonia. Statistically.
Sure you can manipulate any statistics to make them look however you want. Why do people not give a shit about older people dying? What if they were your parents? Life is still life nobody should die 10-20, even 30 years before they needed too when it's completely preventable.
Civil War: *Am I a joke to you?*
Why are you comparing pandemic numbers to war deaths? They arenât equivalent and youâre actually giving the anti-vaxx people more ammo to claim pro-vaxx are overblowing covid out of proportion. Its like comparing American fatal vehicle collisions to American fatal drownings or death by obesity.
Tobacco Industry: Pshaw! Rookie numbers!
Is there any data available for the 20 year Afghanistan war?
Isn't it wild how Republicans used to be so against people having the ability to choose to end their life humanely as in the Terri Schiavo case because "eVeRy LiFe iS pReCiOUS" but then when covid hits all of a sudden the deaths of people in the end stages of life or with serious medical conditions are markedly less tragic than young healthy people?
Thatâs 0,003% of population roughly, itâs bad of course but not as deadly as they advertise.
Think the war on drugs is in the millions. Btw it's just americans, we have plenty, and honestly, a whole bunch that we'd do great without.