What if it was 1000 people with broken bones and zero deaths? Would you find that unbelievable? How about a million?
The point is that there is some number of people with broken bones in a single incident that would make a reasonable person believe that somebody must have died. Maybe for you, it’s a billion people or something ridiculous. For me, it’s under 100.
How many people were on the train though? 100 out of 100 with broken bones? Nah, someone likely died. 100 out of 10,000? That’s a little more believable.
It doesn’t matter how many people were on the train. It matters how many people had broken bones. What if, instead of “broken bones”, it said “broken necks”? If you heard that an incident caused 100 broken necks, but there were zero deaths, would you find it hard to believe?
A broken bone is a serious injury typically caused by a strong impact. The fact that there were so many serious injuries suggests that there would be more deaths.
More than 500 people were sent to hospital after the incident … 423 people have been discharged from hospital … 25 in serious condition
What is stupid is the headline, why not “500+ injured in subway crash” instead of using the number of one kind of injury. As stupid as writing “two people lost a tooth in subway crash”. Still one of the seriously injured could die, but of course I wish everyone a speedy recovery, from injuries but also from the shock of the accident.
102 people with broken bones and zero deaths. Another completely plausible story coming out of China.
Never in my life have I see something so believable…
How is this unbelievable? It’s not uncommon for rail accidents to have low fatalities.
What if it was 1000 people with broken bones and zero deaths? Would you find that unbelievable? How about a million?
The point is that there is some number of people with broken bones in a single incident that would make a reasonable person believe that somebody must have died. Maybe for you, it’s a billion people or something ridiculous. For me, it’s under 100.
How many people were on the train though? 100 out of 100 with broken bones? Nah, someone likely died. 100 out of 10,000? That’s a little more believable.
It doesn’t matter how many people were on the train. It matters how many people had broken bones. What if, instead of “broken bones”, it said “broken necks”? If you heard that an incident caused 100 broken necks, but there were zero deaths, would you find it hard to believe?
A broken bone is a serious injury typically caused by a strong impact. The fact that there were so many serious injuries suggests that there would be more deaths.
that’s impressive stuff, logic bomb.
What is stupid is the headline, why not “500+ injured in subway crash” instead of using the number of one kind of injury. As stupid as writing “two people lost a tooth in subway crash”. Still one of the seriously injured could die, but of course I wish everyone a speedy recovery, from injuries but also from the shock of the accident.
I agree with you, but also I think 100 people with broken bones is loads. That’s a serious injury.
If your headline said “two people lost an arm” instead of a tooth, that would be an astounding statistic worth printing.
…why is that unbelievable?