- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 9 months ago by Anonymous.
December 10, 2012 at 3:35 pm #81724
There is a risk, for the aging debater, that stats you have relied on for years go out of date. It's a pig keeping up, so a little refresher of what we are talking about every now and then helps.
So, lets ask, WHO?Quote:Despite a significant reduction in the number of maternal deaths – from an estimated 543 000 in 1990 to 287 000 in 2010 – the rate of decline is just over half that needed to achieve the MDG target of a three quarters reduction in the mortality ratio between 1990 and 2015.Quote:
Globally, significant progress has been made in reducing mortality in children under five years of age. In 2011, 6.9 million children under five died, compared with 12 million in 1990. Between 1990 and 2011, under-five mortality declined by 41%, from an estimated rate of 87 deaths per 1000 live births to 51. The global rate of decline has also accelerated in recent years – from 1.8% per annum during 1990–2000 to 3.2% during 2000–2011. Despite this improvement, the world is unlikely to achieve the MDG target of a two-thirds reduction in 1990 mortality levels by the year 2015.Quote:
Globally, the number of deaths of children under five years of age fell from 12 million in 1990 to 6.9 million in 2011.
When I didg around a little further, I find the deaths by Nutritional deficiencies are 418,080 (http://apps.who.int/gho/data/?vid=10015) of course, many of the cardiovascular and digestive disease deaths are related to starvation.
I'll through in 182,000 estimated war/civil conflict deaths for 2008.
Its important to go to reliable gold-plated source, my search for stats lead me to several places with what look to me like emotve zombie stats, we need to be rigorous in our approach to such things.
Let's recall, those Millenium Development Goals were supposed to be klow ehanging fruit, to cut/aleviate poverty and its ills, not abolish them. Even those "lighT" goals are going to be missed, wolcome though the advances are…December 11, 2012 at 9:27 am #91203
On Homelessness in the UKhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/16512/Statutory_Homelessness_3rd_Quarter__July_-_Sep__2012_England.pdfQuote:52,960 households were in temporary accommodation on 30 September 2012, 8 per cent higher than at the same date in 2011.December 11, 2012 at 11:58 am #91204
Some fascinating stats from the 2011 census:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20677321Quote:The second-most common category was "No religion", comprising more than a quarter of the population (25.1%; 14.1 million), up from 7.7 million (14.8%) in 2001.
(Note, The Christian 33.2 million is split between several denominations, so it'c clear that no-religion is the biggest "religious" group outright).http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20677515Quote:The census also shows that, while fewer people own their own home, more people own it outright. Just under 15 million households owned their own home in 2011, either with a mortgage or loan, or outright – a decrease of four percentage points since 2001…However, those who owned their home outright increased two percentage points from 29% (6.4 million) to 31% (7.2 million)…The group that rented from a private landlord or letting agency increased by six percentage points from 9% (1.9 million) in 2001 to 15% (3.6 million) in 2011.December 11, 2012 at 7:42 pm #91205ALBKeymasterYoung Master Smeet wrote:Some fascinating stats from the 2011 census:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20677321Quote:The second-most common category was "No religion", comprising more than a quarter of the population (25.1%; 14.1 million), up from 7.7 million (14.8%) in 2001.
Eat your heart out, Robin !December 11, 2012 at 9:21 pm #91206AnonymousInactiveALB wrote:Eat your heart out, Robin !
Under the obvious influence of East Anglian Regional branch Norwich sets itself apart as the capital of Godlessness with the highest proportion of people (42.5%) stating they have no religion.But Rushmoor, in Hampshire, has the greatest concentration of Buddhists………….!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.