Why Cities Are Safer Than Rural Areas: 5 Surprising Facts

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Why Cities Are Safer Than Rural Areas: 5 Surprising Facts (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 7/24/2013 4:55:51 PM EDT

Nat Geo Link.

Why Cities Are Safer Than Rural Areas: 5 Surprising Facts
A new study analyzes risk of car accidents, shootings, and other injuries.

Brian Clark Howard

National Geographic

Published July 24, 2013

For years, people have moved to the country to escape the dangers of big city life. But new research suggests that they may be better off staying put.

A study called "Safety in Numbers: Are Major Cities the Safest Places in the United States?" was published this week by the American College of Emergency Physicians. The researchers, led by Sage R. Myers of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, noted that until their work, the overall injury risk in urban areas versus suburban and rural areas had not been fully described.

So Myers's team attempted to classify deaths from injuries "across the rural-urban continuum." They looked at data on 1,295,919 deaths from injuries in 3,141 U.S. counties from 1999 to 2006. These deaths were caused by car accidents, shootings, falls, drowning, suffocation, and more.

"Injury mortality increased with increasing rurality," the scientists wrote. "Urban counties demonstrated the lowest death rates, signi?cantly less than rural counties."

The researchers found that the risk of death from injury was 1.22 times higher in the most rural counties, compared with the most urban ones.

Five surprising facts from the study:

1. Cities Aren't Statistically More Dangerous.
2. Deaths From Injuries Ticked Up, Not Down.
3. Rural Areas See More Car Deaths Than Suburbs or Cities Do.
4. Race Correlates to Injury Rates in Surprising Ways.
5. Higher Education and Income Equals More Deaths.

The researchers reported that rural counties with the highest percentage of college-educated residents showed a signi?cantly increased risk of injury death, compared with urban counties with the highest number of college-educated residents. Rural areas with the most educated inhabitants also showed higher risk than rural areas with the least educated inhabitants. In contrast, there was no difference in risk of injury death between urban areas with highly educated versus less educated inhabitants. Rural counties with the highest median income showed more risk than urban counties with the highest median income. Rural counties with the highest income showed more risk than rural counties with the lowest income.

View Quote

They go into detail of the five at the link. Now everyone move to the city.

Posted: 7/24/2013 4:58:59 PM EDT

[#1]

Good. Get back in the city, and let me shoot on the empty land.

Posted: 7/24/2013 4:59:45 PM EDT

[#2]

I'll take my chances

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:01:16 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

I'll take my chances

View Quote

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:02:54 PM EDT

[#4]

Apples and oranges again for our academic comparison.

I live 20 minutes from the nearest hospital. Makes getting there in that critical hour much harder than someone in the city that is 5 minutes away.

How many people own cars? Of course rural folks will have a higher auto death rate. They ALL own cars.

Oh, and that 20 minutes away......is WORSE for police response.

Idiots. Raw data analysis without context is meaningless.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:02:58 PM EDT

[#5]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'll take my chances

View Quote

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:03:35 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

I'll take my chances

View Quote

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:04:43 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'll take my chances

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:05:56 PM EDT

[#8]

No shit cities see less deaths then the rural areas as everyone in the countryside drives and a significant number of folks in the big cities take public transportation.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:06:32 PM EDT

[#9]

ambulance travel time is longer out in the stix?

Also I would imagine that in the cities and suburbs there is less opportunity to drive over 35 mph.

Other than that I don't believe it and don't feel like reading the article.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:06 PM EDT

[#10]

I notice they didn't say anything about how they calculated the percentages.... want to bet it was per capita?

Then you have to factor in the average speed limit on rural (as opposed to urban) roads. How many deaths happen in 35mph fender benders vs 55-70mph collisions?

I would need to see methods and raw data before I would believe this...

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:27 PM EDT

[#11]

silly statistics.

city folk tellin us how great it is in cities again.

while they come to the country to "get away"

funny shit....

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:32 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

I'll take my chances

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:54 PM EDT

[#13]

Yeah. Wonder how many traffic deaths counted were from city folk speeding through rural areas on interstates.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:55 PM EDT

[#14]

National Geographic is anti gun. Fuck 'em!

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:07:59 PM EDT

[#15]

Meh. Just like Habitrails are safer than the open field.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:08:43 PM EDT

[#16]

Car accidents? It's easier to die on the 75 MPH Interstate than being stuck in a city traffic jam? What's the ratio of city to suburban/rural auto deaths?

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:14:15 PM EDT

[#17]

So, what it's saying is poor country boy will survive. Rich country gentleman dies horrible death.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:15:18 PM EDT

[#18]

So Detroit should be safe as a mothers womb huh?

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:16:58 PM EDT

[#19]

Awesome. I'm moving to South Chicago next week.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:17:42 PM EDT

[#20]

Good..everyone else can stay in the city where its safe....I'll take my chances out here living dangerously.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:17:47 PM EDT

[#21]

NG; DR

(Nat Geo; didn't read)

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:18:08 PM EDT

[#22]

The day I live in city limits will be the day they arrest me, or take me to the mortuary.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:18:18 PM EDT

[#23]

That's nice dear.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:18:36 PM EDT

[#24]

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:19:11 PM EDT

[#25]

I'm tired of all the bullshit, if someone controls the metrics they can reach any conclusion they choose, and they chose to declare the cities, where people live under the boot of big government, to be "safer".

I'll take my chances here in rural America.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:20:42 PM EDT

[#26]

Hopefully a bunch of country folk will flee to the city.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:21:48 PM EDT

[#27]

yall feel to move back ya hear....ill be good on my acreage

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:22:19 PM EDT

[#28]

Chicago must be a safe haven then, right?

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:22:29 PM EDT

[#29]

Lets pick some narrow insignificant stats to keep the sheeple corralled up in their flock.......

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:23:09 PM EDT

[#30]

That's because cities are antiseptic mamby-pamby places where the people don't interact with the natural environment.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:23:38 PM EDT

[#31]

Same here

Quote History

Quoted:
I'll take my chances

View Quote

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:23:56 PM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
Good. Get back in the city, and let me shoot on the empty land.

View Quote

Good post!.....Can't shot in the city

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:25:09 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'll take my chances

View Quote

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:29:16 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Nat Geo Link.

Why Cities Are Safer Than Rural Areas: 5 Surprising Facts
A new study analyzes risk of car accidents, shootings, and other injuries.

Brian Clark Howard

National Geographic

Published July 24, 2013

For years, people have moved to the country to escape the dangers of big city life. But new research suggests that they may be better off staying put.

A study called "Safety in Numbers: Are Major Cities the Safest Places in the United States?" was published this week by the American College of Emergency Physicians. The researchers, led by Sage R. Myers of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, noted that until their work, the overall injury risk in urban areas versus suburban and rural areas had not been fully described.

So Myers's team attempted to classify deaths from injuries "across the rural-urban continuum." They looked at data on 1,295,919 deaths from injuries in 3,141 U.S. counties from 1999 to 2006. These deaths were caused by car accidents, shootings, falls, drowning, suffocation, and more.

"Injury mortality increased with increasing rurality," the scientists wrote. "Urban counties demonstrated the lowest death rates, signi?cantly less than rural counties."

The researchers found that the risk of death from injury was 1.22 times higher in the most rural counties, compared with the most urban ones.

Five surprising facts from the study:

1. Cities Aren't Statistically More Dangerous.
2. Deaths From Injuries Ticked Up, Not Down.
3. Rural Areas See More Car Deaths Than Suburbs or Cities Do.
4. Race Correlates to Injury Rates in Surprising Ways.
5. Higher Education and Income Equals More Deaths.

The researchers reported that rural counties with the highest percentage of college-educated residents showed a signi?cantly increased risk of injury death, compared with urban counties with the highest number of college-educated residents. Rural areas with the most educated inhabitants also showed higher risk than rural areas with the least educated inhabitants. In contrast, there was no difference in risk of injury death between urban areas with highly educated versus less educated inhabitants. Rural counties with the highest median income showed more risk than urban counties with the highest median income. Rural counties with the highest income showed more risk than rural counties with the lowest income.

View Quote

They go into detail of the five at the link. Now everyone move to the city.

View Quote

lol

What I'm gathering here is it's good to be a dumb, poor hick than a rich, educated college boy living in the country.

ETA - It really boils down to this: "The paper also noted that trauma physicians tend to be more accessible and better trained and equipped in urban areas, which may contribute to lower death rates from all kinds of injuries."

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:30:00 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Nat Geo Link.

Why Cities Are Safer Than Rural Areas: 5 Surprising Facts
A new study analyzes risk of car accidents, shootings, and other injuries.

Brian Clark Howard

National Geographic

Published July 24, 2013

For years, people have moved to the country to escape the dangers of big city life. But new research suggests that they may be better off staying put.

A study called "Safety in Numbers: Are Major Cities the Safest Places in the United States?" was published this week by the American College of Emergency Physicians. The researchers, led by Sage R. Myers of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, noted that until their work, the overall injury risk in urban areas versus suburban and rural areas had not been fully described.

So Myers's team attempted to classify deaths from injuries "across the rural-urban continuum." They looked at data on 1,295,919 deaths from injuries in 3,141 U.S. counties from 1999 to 2006. These deaths were caused by car accidents, shootings, falls, drowning, suffocation, and more.

"Injury mortality increased with increasing rurality," the scientists wrote. "Urban counties demonstrated the lowest death rates, signi?cantly less than rural counties."

The researchers found that the risk of death from injury was 1.22 times higher in the most rural counties, compared with the most urban ones.

Five surprising facts from the study:

1. Cities Aren't Statistically More Dangerous.
2. Deaths From Injuries Ticked Up, Not Down.
3. Rural Areas See More Car Deaths Than Suburbs or Cities Do.
4. Race Correlates to Injury Rates in Surprising Ways.
5. Higher Education and Income Equals More Deaths.

The researchers reported that rural counties with the highest percentage of college-educated residents showed a signi?cantly increased risk of injury death, compared with urban counties with the highest number of college-educated residents. Rural areas with the most educated inhabitants also showed higher risk than rural areas with the least educated inhabitants. In contrast, there was no difference in risk of injury death between urban areas with highly educated versus less educated inhabitants. Rural counties with the highest median income showed more risk than urban counties with the highest median income. Rural counties with the highest income showed more risk than rural counties with the lowest income.

View Quote

They go into detail of the five at the link. Now everyone move to the city.

View Quote

So, college educated folks are tragically accident prone? Damn I better watch out!

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:31:16 PM EDT

[#36]

What I took away from that article is that the rich PhD types needs to stay out of the country because they don't have enough common sense to survive. It is the truth too. I have seen a lot of rich retirees that were supposed to be smart move in around here. They buy a farm, a tractor, a four wheeler, and some cattle. They usually end up turning over the tractor, wrecking the 4-wheeler, and killing the cattle. They can't seem to figure out you can't take a tractor sideways out a 1:1 slope even if it is 4 wheel drive. Yes, I saw this happen, and yes, the guy was not hurt, I told him he needs to stick to riding his lawn mower and get rid of the tractor though.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:31:32 PM EDT

[#37]

FNG

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:31:43 PM EDT

[#38]

The first page of the actual study that the NatGeo article refers to contains this statement:

"
What this study adds to our knowledge
In this time-series analysis of 1,295,929 injury-related
deaths in the United States, overall injury and vehicular
trauma death rates were higher in rural areas. This
pattern was not seen in firearm-related death rates
"

I'm still reading...

Edit to add this (copied verbatim from the original study):

Injury mechanisms evaluated were cuts, drowning,
falls, fire, firearms, machinery, transportation (including the subset
of motor vehicle transport), environmental (flood, animal attack,
cold exposure), overexertion, poisoning, struck (hit by object/
person/animal), and suffocation (Table E1, available online at
http://www.annemergmed.com).

To me, this study says that you're more likely to die from an accident if you live farther from care facilities than someone who lives closer.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:35:05 PM EDT

[#39]

Haven't these people ever seen a zombie movie? WTF??

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:35:12 PM EDT

[#40]

Farming seems to be more common in the rural areas.

It's one of the more dangerous professions to be in.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:35:34 PM EDT

[#41]

You must move to urban areas where you are easily controlled, and your tax dollars are available to the teeming masses of the underclass.

Move now

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:36:57 PM EDT

[#42]

People...people people...they are compleatly right....matter of fact I'm going to tell every democrat this information....I believe they all need this info to better thier lives.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:39:23 PM EDT

[#43]

I'd rather die by a Doug Fir dropping on me than some asshole shanking me for my wallet. Out it the country safety is on you. In the city your life or death is in the hands of other people.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:42:52 PM EDT

[#44]

risk of death from injury was 1.22 times higher in the most rural counties

View Quote

I bet chainsaws and tractors account for most of that difference. Every member of my family and my neighbors back in SC that I can think of that hurt themselves were hurt by one of those two things.z

ETA: I forgot about ladders.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:44:30 PM EDT

[#45]

They must have included in rural deaths the urban dead people that were dumped in the rural areas in order to hide the crime.

Posted: 7/24/2013 5:45:28 PM EDT

[#46]

The posted "facts" are in no way facts.

I want to see their data base, their methodology and their analyses models. How did they derive their conclusions? What did they sample?

As has been stated, did they base their "numbers" on total population of a venue...per capita? How large was the sample and how large the area[s] sampled.

This appears to be just another bullshit libtard article designed to move all of us back into the cities so they can all take nice nature walks.