You obviously didn't read the attachment that I posted from the Department of Veterans Affairs. It does state the sources, it does state who, what when, how and "How Many".
On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 1:36 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > The piece I found with Google cited: > "That figure is a national estimate based on a *Department of Veterans > Affairs analysis* of death records from 21 states. Though it is usually > cited in the context of the recent wars, most of those suicides involved > older veterans, who account for the vast majority of the nation's 22 > million former service members." > > The piece you posted neither contradicts that source NOR provides source > data (alternate or otherwise) itself. > > FURTHERMORE, the meme stated, "If Congress committed suicide at the same > rate as veterans, there would be no one left after 25 days." > The article you posted only addressed "active military" -- which is not > claimed by the meme. > > BOTH substance AND truth have been shown contrary to the typical fallacy > spew bromide offered. > > The BIGGER question, however, is what -- exactly -- do these nonsensical > exercises and memes provide? > > Regard$, > --MJ > > "I support the troops so much that I want them to live their lives safe at > home with those who love them." - Jennifer Liberty > > > > At 01:13 PM 3/1/2015, you wrote: > > One word, three syllables:  "Asinine": > > > > *But There Isn't An Epidemic Of Suicide In The US Military* > > > > Comment Now > <http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/02/but-there-isnt-an-epidemic-of-suicide-in-the-us-military/#comment_reply> > > Follow Comments <http://??.htm> > > <http://??.htm>* > http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/02/but-there-isnt-an-epidemic-of-suicide-in-the-us-military/ > <http://??.htm> * > <http://??.htm> > I was very surprised to see this headline in The Guardian today > <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/01/us-military-suicide-epidemic-veteran>: > US military struggling to stop suicide epidemic among war veterans > > It’s not all that unusual for The Guardian to snipe at the US military > of course, but something about the way the subject was being treated > puzzled me. Last year, more active-duty soldiers killed themselves than > died in combat. > > Is this a story about how much better military medicine has got or one > about how the system is driving huge numbers into suicide? The way the > paper tells the story it’s that there is indeed some epidemic of suicide > sweeping through the ranks of the military and veterans. And my problem is > that having looked at the numbers I just don’t see it. > > I should of course point out that any and every suicide is a tragedy. Both > for the person dying and for those they leave behind. And I would go on and > insist that just one suicide is one too many. However, it’s also > necessary to note that suicide does indeed happen in all walks of life. > What we need to know is whether there are more than the normal number in > one specific profession or occupation. Only then can we start to argue that > there’s something specific to that occupation that leads to suicide. > > For example, with the military: it’s easy enough to postulate that a > rise in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) will lead to a rise in > suicides. Indeed, we’d probably expect such a thing to happen. Thus, as > more see combat, more suffer from that stress, we’d see the rate rise. > > But before we conclude that this is happening we do in fact need to check > and see whether the rate is odd. Is out of order for the society which > people come from. And that’s where this story of an epidemic of military > suicides rather falls down. The actual suicide rate in the US military > seems to be around and about that for the US as a whole. Soldiers and > ex-soldiers don’t kill themselves in any greater numbers than the average > American does. > > Here’s the numbers being quoted: In 2012, for the first time in at > least a generation, the number of active-duty soldiers who killed > themselves, 177, exceeded the 176 who were killed while in the war zone. To > put that another way, more of America’s serving soldiers died at their > own hands than in pursuit of the enemy. > > OK: obviously that’s both 177 and 176 too many. But is that 177 > something unexpected, out of the ordinary? > > The US active service military is some 1.5 million strong > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_military>. The general suicide rate > among all Americans is 12 per 100,000 per year. So, 15 x 12 would give us > the expected number of suicides among active duty military: 180 per year. > But that’s not quite right for a number of reasons: the most obvious > being that they’re talking about “soldiers†not military. There’s > some 600,000 (A note about numbers here. Getting the first digit and the > number of digits correct is enough. Measuring the number of solders to the > 6 th digit would just give a spurious sense of accuracy.) apparently, > meaning that our expected number would be 6 x 12, or 72. > > Ah, but wait, by far the majority of those active service members will be > male (women only just this past week being cleared for combat operations > for example) so perhaps we should use the male suicide rate, not the > population one? At around 25 > <http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/suicide/statistics/trends03.html> > that gives us 6 x 25: 150. It’s not immediately apparent that the suicide > rate in active service troops is higher than that of the general > population. Especially when we add one more point > <http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/Suicide_DataSheet-a.pdf>: There > is one suicide for every 25 attempted suicides > > I don’t think it’s all that much of a stretch to suggest that active > duty troops, those who by definition have access to live ammunition and a > gun, have a slightly different ratio of attempts to actual suicide. > > We can go on with the numbers: Across all branches of the US military and > the reserves, a similar disturbing trend was recorded. In all, 349 service > members took their own lives in 2012, while a lesser number, 295, died in > combat. > > All military is more like 2.3 million people. 23 x 25 gives us 575 as our > expected number assuming the military is all male. So the suicide rate > seems to be lower than that of the male population (although higher than > that expected from the rate for the general population, which would be > 276). one of an astonishing 6,500 former military personnel who killed > themselves in 2012, roughly equivalent to one every 80 minutes. > > And yes, that is a high and shocking number. But apparently there are 21 > <http://www.infoplease.com/spot/veteranscensus1.html> million veterans > <http://www.infoplease.com/spot/veteranscensus1.html> in the US. 95% of > them male so using again the male suicide rate we’d expect 5,250. > > It’s just very difficult indeed to see that there is an epidemic of > suicides in the military: either serving personnel or veterans. Within the > limits of the statistics being used the rates seem to be a little below or > a little above those for American men generally. I just don’t see where > the “epidemic†comes from. > > Some of the earlier stories on this (these stories come in waves as the > Pentagon releases suicide statistics twice a year. Once estimates and > unconfirmed cases, once a full tally) do note this point about the suicide > rate > <http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/28/16540098-like-an-airborne-disease-concern-grows-about-military-suicides-spreading-within-families?lite>: > On Jan. 14, Department of Defense officials acknowledged that during 2012, > service members committed suicide at a record pace as more than 349 people > took their own lives across the four branches. The military suicide rate is > slightly lower than that of the general public. > > Then again, we seem to have The Pentagon itself not quite understanding the > numbers > <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-25/military-faces-suicide-epidemic-panetta-tells-u-s-lawmakers.html>: > The U.S. military is experiencing a suicide “epidemic,†with as many as > 206 service members having taken their own lives this year, Defense > Secretary Leon Panetta told lawmakers today. > > (The numbers are different as it refers to a different year). > > There’s no grand conclusion here I’m afraid. Are there too many > suicides? Most certainly, both in and out of the military for each and > every one is a tragedy. Is the number of military suicides growing? It > would appear so, but then so is the number of veterans so that isn’t > entirely a surprise. But if the actual rate of suicide among current and > past military members is the same (or possibly even a little lower) than > that in the general population then it’s very difficult indeed to > conclude that we’ve an “epidemic†going on. > > There is a small conclusion though. Before deciding that there’s a > problem in a specific sector of society we do in fact have to go study the > numbers to check that there is indeed a problem in a specific section of > society. Given that the military suicide rate is similar to that of the > country as a whole we’d have to conclude that the military suicide rate > isn’t simply a military problem. If anything, it’s a societal one. But > even that’s difficult to support given that the US suicide rate is very > definitely > mid-table <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate> > as compared to other nations. > > I’m afraid that I’m just not getting the attention being given to this > story. > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 10:57 AM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > <sigh> <type> www.google.com <type> "what is the suicide rate for > veterans" <click> Detailed study confirms high suicide rate among recent > veterans By ALAN ZAREMBO > <http://www.latimes.com/la-bio-alan-zarembo-staff.html> January 14, 2015 > http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-veteran-suicide-20150115-story.html > <peruse> > "One statistic has become a rallying cry: 22 veterans take their own lives > each day. "That figure is a national estimate based on a Department of > Veterans Affairs analysis of death records from 21 states. Though it is > usually cited in the context of the recent wars, most of those suicides > involved older veterans, who account for the vast majority of the nation's > 22 million former service members." > (435 + 100) Members of Congress / 22 Suicides per day = 24.3 days > What is a "left extremist"? How is the meme "spin"? Does pretending > "truth" and "substance" does not exist do *anything* other than help in the > maintenance of that pleasing vision of yours? > Regard$, --MJ > "They changed the name from Armistice Day to Veterans Day because they > want people to forget that US soldiers died for nothing in WWI." -- Jacob > Hornberger > > > > At 10:27 AM 3/1/2015, you wrote: > > â€â€¹More far left extremist sspin, with no substance or truth to support > such a ridiculous foundation. â€â€¹ On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 9:03 AM, > Travis <[email protected]> wrote: Hope they go for it. On Sun, Mar 1, > 2015 at 7:57 AM, plainolamerican < [email protected]> wrote: [image: > []] -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For > options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum  * > Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active > and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking > news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed > to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this > group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to > [email protected]. For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For > options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum  > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's > active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest > breaking news, and more. > --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop > receiving emails from it, send an email to > [email protected]. For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For > options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum  * > Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active > and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking > news, and more. > --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop > receiving emails from it, send an email to > [email protected]. For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For > options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum  * > Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active > and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking > news, and more. > --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop > receiving emails from it, send an email to > [email protected]. For more options, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
