Comments on: Is Being in the Military America’s Most Dangerous Job? http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/ Screams in the Night Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:41:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Brandon http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13586 Brandon Tue, 14 Aug 2007 18:03:11 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13586 I would also be interested to see a further number with severe injuries included -- say loss of limbs, severe brain injuries or blindness. Fishermen drown and lose fingers... but I don't think lobsters are making IEDs... I would also be interested to see a further number with severe injuries included — say loss of limbs, severe brain injuries or blindness. Fishermen drown and lose fingers… but I don’t think lobsters are making IEDs…

]]> By: Pat http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13467 Pat Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:43:06 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13467 An interesting (albeit gruesome) question, but your inputs are flawed. The number of servicemen and women listed is for all members of the US Armed Forces (note that the wikipedia reference is dead, however, so that would need to be verified). However, the number of fatalities you use is for Iraq ONLY, so it does not take into account, say, Afghanistan. So, to derive a more accurate number, you would have to: a) find a similar fataility listing for all deployments (heck, including recruits in boot camp) to use as your numerator; or b) use only the total troops to serve in Iraq as your denominator. After all, not all 1.426 million were there. The highest total deployment for 2006 was about 160,000 at one time. Now, I probably can't get the exact number of individual service men & women to go through at that time, but even if you figure twice that number cycled through the country throughout the course of the year, you end up with: (846/320,000) * 100,000 = 264.4 deaths per 100,000. Yikes! An interesting (albeit gruesome) question, but your inputs are flawed.

The number of servicemen and women listed is for all members of the US Armed Forces (note that the wikipedia reference is dead, however, so that would need to be verified). However, the number of fatalities you use is for Iraq ONLY, so it does not take into account, say, Afghanistan.

So, to derive a more accurate number, you would have to:
a) find a similar fataility listing for all deployments (heck, including recruits in boot camp) to use as your numerator; or

b) use only the total troops to serve in Iraq as your denominator. After all, not all 1.426 million were there.

The highest total deployment for 2006 was about 160,000 at one time. Now, I probably can’t get the exact number of individual service men & women to go through at that time, but even if you figure twice that number cycled through the country throughout the course of the year, you end up with:
(846/320,000) * 100,000 = 264.4 deaths per 100,000. Yikes!

]]> By: ben http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13465 ben Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:08:19 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13465 I think the upshot here is that going into the military is extremely safe, right? I think the upshot here is that going into the military is extremely safe, right?

]]> By: -craigt http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13426 -craigt Sun, 12 Aug 2007 19:22:33 +0000 http://wdr1.com/blog/2007/08/11/is-being-in-the-military-americas-most-dangerous-job/#comment-13426 I don't think it's a math issue. I think it's job issue. There are MANY non-combative jobs that are diluting your numbers. I think for more accurate account you would have to make some type of distinction. Notice it says Aircraft pilots and not EVERYONE who works in the airplane or airline industry, because that would dilute the numbers. So at the very least you'd have to split up military jobs somehow. That may be why they are not included as it could get complicated and then the endless arguments as to what is what. My 2 cents. I don’t think it’s a math issue. I think it’s job issue. There are MANY non-combative jobs that are diluting your numbers. I think for more accurate account you would have to make some type of distinction. Notice it says Aircraft pilots and not EVERYONE who works in the airplane or airline industry, because that would dilute the numbers.

So at the very least you’d have to split up military jobs somehow. That may be why they are not included as it could get complicated and then the endless arguments as to what is what. My 2 cents.

]]>