How people die vs. media coverage of death • Hacker News Board

Re: How people die vs. media coverage of death

#91

Post by gknoy » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 5:16 AM UTC

gknoy wrote: post #75

DanBC wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gun suicides matter, but we might address those very differently from homicides. The main prevention measure for both murder and suicide is to reduce access to methods. It's fine for a nation to say they make the choice not to restrict access to guns, but they need to be honest about the increased numbers of people dying this will cause.

> reduce access to methods A sibling questioned the validity of this for suicide, and I agree. Anyone sufficiently motivated to kill themselves will find a way. Knife, rope, drug overdose, threaten a police officer, vehicular "accident", skydiving, move-to-Oregon (for legally assisted suicide, that is -- OR's a nice place :)), sit in the garage while the car is running... every single one of these things is something…

Hm; I stand corrected then. Thanks, guys, especially for pointing out the car exhaust and other things. All of those things are true (about additional time to be talked out, etc). I was coming from the perspective of someone who followed Sir Terry Pratchett's campaign for legal suicide in response to things like Alzheimer's, where it isn't the kind of thing one is likely to be talked out of. In that case, of course, people are campaigning for legal euthanasia, so it's a bit different.

Re: How people die vs. media coverage of death

#92

Post by CalRobert » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 8:12 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #86

LifeLiverTransp wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reduce access to the methods to end ones life? Is this irony?

We know from interviews with survivors that many people don't have a "diagnosed mental illness", but have something more like "rapid onset dispair". And that more people survive if they don't have easy access to their prefered method. For example, in the UK this has meant phasing out some ineffective and dangerous medication; reducing the pack sizes of others; and encouraging doctors to safer prescribing of opioids.

Is that why I can get a bottle of 500 acetaminophen tablets in the US or six bucks, but have to pay Boots 4 Euro for 40 of them?? (I don't recall the exact dose but it was the same per table)

I always feel like a drug runner coming back to the US with bottles of generic tylenol and advil.

Re: How people die vs. media coverage of death

#93

Post by baking » Tue, Apr 17, 2018, 2:06 PM UTC

fastball wrote: post #73

baking wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone dies. The only significance of death is if it occurs sooner than otherwise expected. For the vast majority of people that die in old age what to list on the death certificate can be a conundrum, but it is safe to say no one will ever be sued for malpractice if heart disease is listed as the cause of death. 80% of all deaths due to heart disease occur in the 65 and older population. https://www.cdc.gov/injury…

Right, but I think the point of the OP is to say "Good news everybody! Despite what you've seen on TV and read in the paper, you're still overwhelmingly more likely to die of old age than at the hands of murderers/terrorists." And to go along with that, I believe it is trying to ask the question "is it not just as important to follow the trends in so-called 'death by natural causes' as it is to follow trends for 'unn…

If I was over 65 (and I'm close) I would worry more about what put me in the hospital than what appeared on my death certificate. The two are surprisingly unrelated in the elderly.