• Saryn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Not seeing anything inherently wrong with the data viz (obviously not talking about the veracity of the data itself or its geographic/linguistic scope as that’s another matter).

      Would you elaborate what you mean?

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        if you are going to bring up comparisons based on sex, you pollute the data including things that ONLY can possibly effect one sex. what good is it to compare how much post pregnancy care effects women vs men? or to have half the comparisons divvy all the different ways you can classify a motor cycle accident, where there is the same outcome for all of them.

        • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I assume it is based on data of people being admitted to hospitals, as titled. So my guess is this is more about how the medical system breaks the data down, and they selected for the highest disparities of reported sex.

          • WraithGear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 hours ago

            seems to point to men getting hurt based on high risk behavior or professional expectation. but women seem to be arriving for biological functions.

            though honestly if you consider child birth both a high risk behavior and and societal expectation then the comparison is valid, but more clarity on the why it’s like this would help.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The line item for obstetric and gynecological devices is interesting.