Meta-discussion, but I think "statistical deaths" - deaths where the causation has to be inferred, rather than being completely obviously monocausal - have been a big feature of quality of life improvement in the 19th and 20th century, but are now running into an informational problem. Namely that you have to believe the statistics in order for the process to work, but it's increasingly common to lie with statistics.…
I think a problem with statistical deaths is that deaths can be double counted. If you did a meta-study and added up all the claimed deaths, wouldn't there be more statistical deaths than actual deaths? I also suspect that it's fairly likely that statistical deaths are based on comparing actual deaths to a hypothetical model in which the statistical cause of death is removed, but if the assumptions of the model are w…
Anyone worth a crap uses some sort of time based metric for loss of life. Wheezing into the grave at 80 instead of 81 is very different than dropping dead a 20 and these sorts of metrics are meant to reflect that.
But those metrics don't get you big numbers with lots of digits in front of the decimal that get your article publishes, posted on HN and then clicked on in droves.
The people doing the primary research often are aiming for accuracy but they are done a disservice by shortsighted people optimizing for a few extra cents of add revenue or a few more upvotes.