Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Unequally Yoked

Debunking the NYT’s Numbers on Contraception

Last updated on: September 17, 2014 at 12:23 pm   by Leah Libresco

Debunking the NYT’s Numbers on Contraception 2014-09-17T12:23:16-04:00 Leah Libresco

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

graphs

You may have seen the New York Times‘s much shared infographic on contraception failure rates, and I’m here — statistics cop badge in hand — to tell you that it ain’t necessarily so.  There are some huge methodological flaws in the way that the NYT chose to model the risk of unplanned pregnancy over ten years, and I’m explaining just how badly they went wrong at The American Conservative.

The NYT generated these graphs by looking only at failure rates for contraception over one year, and then doing some arithmetic to model the chance of failure over the long term… It’s the right kind of statistics to use if you’re talking about some fixed risk, like the chance of winning a coin flip. But the chance of unintended pregnancy isn’t likely to remain constant over a 10-year period.

For one thing, the women who get pregnant in their first year of using a particular form of contraception may be different than the rest of the women in their cohort. A significant proportion of the women who wind up pregnant may be more fertile than average (or are having sex with a guy with excellent sperm). Irregular cycles may make it harder for them to use NFP charting successfully. They may work schedules that make it much harder to stick to an “every day, same time” form of contraception like the Pill. The may be college students having a lot of tipsy sex, and not remembering to manage condoms very well.

Once those women get pregnant in the first year, they’re out of the analysis, as far as the NYT is concerned. But the charts continue to use the risk probabilities set by the most unsuccessful group of contraceptors as the baseline risk for everyone who remains.

Read more at The American Conservative

There aren’t very good numbers on long term risk of pregnancy for contracepting couples (for reasons I discuss in the article) but the NYT‘s bad model is worse than just throwing up our hands and saying that the problem is too hard to approximate well.

Particularly when you take this approach out of the abstract, hypothetical domain of a journal and put it in the paper of record, where people are likely to act on it.

Uncategorized

health/medicine

statistics

Previous Post



September 16, 2014

And a little child shall lead them (for the lack of anyone else) [Pope Francis Bookclub]

Next Post



September 18, 2014 And You Shall Know the Free Thinkers By Their Cussing?


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 7 Quick Takes Apologetics Atheism Book Conversion Debate Tactics Debates Epistemology/Philosophy Housekeeping Ideological Turing Test Marriage Morality in Practice Parsing Catholicism Possibly Heretical Radio Reviews/Recommendations Sequence Index Spiritual Practice Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 January 2017 December 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does the Bible say about pride?

Select your answer to see how you score.

It goes before a fall It is harmless It is a virtue It always wins

Related posts from Unequally Yoked

Catholic

Harrison Bergeron-ing a Too-Exceptional Sprinter

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

"Just Treating Symptoms" can be a great approach

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

The Stories We Tell About Illness

Unequally Yoked

Catholic

Designing Emotional Contraception

Unequally Yoked

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic

Why Mercy, Not Condemnation, Leads Sinners Home

Christ was accused of being a sinner, not only because of his...

Desert Fathers And Mothers On Anger And Community

The desert fathers and mothers often reminded each other against the dangers...

Is Faith Really Blind? What Skeptics Get Wrong

Faith is belief without evidence and reason. So saith the famous (infamous?)...

Creation, Preservation, and Teleology in Catholic Theology

As I write this, it is very early Monday morning. Like millions...

Why I Choose the Eucharist Over the Sermon

Choose the Eucharist, Not the Sermon What are we supposed to get...

5 Design Elements Found in Spiritually Rooted Homes

Putting Spirituality Into Home Decor Our homes are more than our living...

view all Catholic blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube