Question Exemplar Teen Pregnancy rate

Okay, Mrs. Carson, when she explains Hercules Syndrome, says that Exemplar Teens get pregnant at double the national average...

But how does she know that?

Firstly, that national average, is measured per thousand.

Are there even a thousand Exemplar teens at any one time?

And then presuming only half are girls there's gotta be two thousand Exemplar teens...

Then who's doing the counting, and how...

And you need a good sample size for statistical accuracy...

Questions, questions, if we're not assuming she's making it up.

Malady wrote: Okay, Mrs. Carson, when she explains Hercules Syndrome, says that Exemplar Teens get pregnant at double the national average...

But how does she know that?

Either because the MCO has been monitoring every mutant that can be identified, over multiple decades, looking to see how fast normal population mechanics leads to replacement, or there's been a study conducted over multiple years looking at how many births at one or more hospitals occur to teens who are also mutants.

If the question is pregnancy/fertility, and one knows what the manifestation rate is for the population, less scrupulous researcher might collect data from one or more abortion clinics.

Malady wrote: Firstly, that national average, is measured per thousand.

It is measured as births per thousand persons of the age group for that year.

Malady wrote: Are there even a thousand Exemplar teens at any one time?

If there were only two hundred and fifty teens at Exemplar 1 or higher, they'd be teens for more than the one year. If we define "teen" as ages 12-19, the group would be teens for an average of four years before they all aged out, yielding one thousand teen-years, and 46 babies aged 0-8.

Malady wrote: And you need a good sample size for statistical accuracy.

When the sample size approaches "all of them" that is a false assumption. Otherwise, there are a number of factors that go into estimating what a representative sample of a population would be.

Malady wrote: Firstly, that national average, is measured per thousand.

That has nothing to do with anything. It's just an alternate way of representing a percentage. "Twenty in a thousand," "one in fifty," "one fiftieth," and "two percent" all refer to the same number: 0.02.

So, if you've surveyed 692 exemplar girls and found that 28 of them experienced a teenage pregnancy, you can just divide that out and get 0.04. Then you can divide 20 by 1000 to get 0.02. Then you can divide 0.04 by 0.02 and find that the rate for exemplar teen pregnancy is twice the national average.

You will, of course, have significantly lower accuracy due to the much smaller sample size (unless, as null says, you measure basically all of them... but whether that's perfect or not depends on whether you're interested in cataloging empirical data or making predictions -- for predictions, it will still have low accuracy). You can mitigate that by aggregating multiple years of results together, though you need to remember to do the same for the number you compare against so that it's a valid comparison.

Even if you measure all of them, if the sample is small it's hard to discern trends from statistical anomalies. For instance, if you researched male teen mutant preferences in terms of hair color between the years 2006 and 2010, you would find them favoring redheads significantly more than the average population, even if you tested *all* male teen mutants in that age bracket. But it would be premature to assume that something in their mutations make them prefer redheads; rather, you might just be detecting the effects of the presence of Fey in the campus, which houses a significant percentage of the world's teen mutants. Similarly, the year 2006-2007 might have represented a peak of sexual activity in campus, simply due to the presence of Carmilla.

My sister is a medical doctor, and she liked to rant about how researchers draw stupid conclusions from statistics. Like a very rare disease that has ten known cases: four in babies, two in prepubescent children, and four in elderly. Naively computing the average age of the patients yields something like "30 years." Which is obviously misleading, but you see this kind of stuff all the time, because lots of people who have no concept of how statistics really work just pull the AVG function in Excel and think that's fine.

My personal favourite example of statistics being weird is that the exact same test becomes less accurate as the thing your looking for becomes rarer.

As a concrete example assume that you have a genetic test for the MGC (gotta keep the example relevant) that has a 1% false positive rate and you test 1000 people.

If 10% of people have it you get around 110 positive results, 100 genuine and 10 false, which means that a positive result means a 1-in-10 chance you DON'T have the MGC.
If 0.1% of people have it you get around 11 positive results, 1 genuine and 10 false, which means that a positive result means a 1-in-10 chance you DO have the MGC.

I almost majored in stats at uni and could talk for DAYS about its use and misuse but I feel I should restrict myself to this single example.

"Double the national average" means just that, take the most recent numbers available for the US(2017) which puts it at 18.8 in 1,000 which if you put into a percentage, it's 1.8 percent of teens. So if it's double, then the rate is 3.6 percent which could easily be 360 or 3600 depending on how many teens there actually are who 1. manifest as exemplars and 2. are known through databases.

Bare in mind that the MCO would not have access to any of this information. This would be their private medical records so they would have no idea WHO is pregnant, they would only know that there are X number of pregnant mutants and unless it is reported in a paper the fact that they are exemplars wouldn't show up.


As a side note there is likely not one pregnant person at Whateley due to the availability of "exemplar condoms" as was discussed early in the stories- I believe it was mentioned specifically in "To Be Merry and Escape From It All" that they were in use at the school among the guys especially the exemplar guys.

It might be mentioned that condoms are not perfectly effective at preventing pregnancy. What the rate of failure of condoms is IDK. I also don't have a clue as to what the failure rate might be for exemplar condoms...
But all of that indicates that there ought to be at least one girl pregnant on the Whateley campus... Unless someone has actually perfected spells that the faculty is using to prevent such occurrences!

Well, a few minor corrections.

First, Mrs Carson does not say the pregnancy rate is double. When Stronghold asks, "What is Hercules Syndrome?" Mrs Carson turns to JADIS to explain it and it is Jadis that declares the rate is double. She also doen't say the Teen Maternal rate is double, she states specifically the Pregnancy rate, not necessarily pregnancies carried to term.

Then of course there is the question of where Jadis acquired the information she is quoting.

E. E. Nalley wrote: Well, a few minor corrections.

First, Mrs Carson does not say the pregnancy rate is double. When Stronghold asks, "What is Hercules Syndrome?" Mrs Carson turns to JADIS to explain it and it is Jadis that declares the rate is double. She also doen't say the Teen Maternal rate is double, she states specifically the Pregnancy rate, not necessarily pregnancies carried to term.

Then of course there is the question of where Jadis acquired the information she is quoting.

Of course as Jadis is an information broker, we can presume that her sources are as accurate as can realistically be achieved, the ethics of said sources is not certain however.

mhalpern wrote:

E. E. Nalley wrote: Well, a few minor corrections.

First, Mrs Carson does not say the pregnancy rate is double. When Stronghold asks, "What is Hercules Syndrome?" Mrs Carson turns to JADIS to explain it and it is Jadis that declares the rate is double. She also doen't say the Teen Maternal rate is double, she states specifically the Pregnancy rate, not necessarily pregnancies carried to term.

Then of course there is the question of where Jadis acquired the information she is quoting.

Of course as Jadis is an information broker, we can presume that her sources are as accurate as can realistically be achieved, the ethics of said sources is not certain however.

The CDC is the main source of information like that, and given her closeness to Jobe it wouldn't be hard to get them to part with the information without giving up much of substance on her part so long as she can help keep Jobe at bay(even if it may be impossible).

Efindumb wrote:

mhalpern wrote:

E. E. Nalley wrote: Well, a few minor corrections.

First, Mrs Carson does not say the pregnancy rate is double. When Stronghold asks, "What is Hercules Syndrome?" Mrs Carson turns to JADIS to explain it and it is Jadis that declares the rate is double. She also doen't say the Teen Maternal rate is double, she states specifically the Pregnancy rate, not necessarily pregnancies carried to term.

Then of course there is the question of where Jadis acquired the information she is quoting.

Of course as Jadis is an information broker, we can presume that her sources are as accurate as can realistically be achieved, the ethics of said sources is not certain however.

The CDC is the main source of information like that, and given her closeness to Jobe it wouldn't be hard to get them to part with the information without giving up much of substance on her part so long as she can help keep Jobe at bay(even if it may be impossible).

Positing the CDC as the source, one only has to know the correct form to fill out to request such information that is freely available to anyone (or requiring nominal fee) requesting such info. At least I think that at most it requires knowing the info exists, knowing which form to use, and finally (possibly) knowing which bureaucrat to submit the paperwork too, because sometimes if you submit the paperwork to the wrong bureaucrat (even in the correct dpt, of the correct agency) paperwork can mysteriously go missing, or take the longest possible route to the person actually able to act on the paperwork.

Okay, folks? Let's say Jadis is right.

that exemplar pregancy rate is double.


That means *nothing* As someone pointed out: Stats can be abused. I wouldn't say we are having a Mark Twain moment, here, but another point to consdier: Stats *suggest*.

I'd also point out that a *fair* number of mutants are all in one spot, and ask this:
"Is it the mutation, or is it the location?"

Or more precisely: With Jadis' number being taken as 'accurate' (within one statistical deviation, and in a sample size this small...) How many of those are on Whateley (and before you go "Exemplar condoms!" um... yeah, think back to your teenager days)? I'm not going to say some stats I know about, since it's been a while, but suffice it to say: It's suggestive, but other stats I *do* know about (I'll leave it to the researcher to look at *other* boarding schools) suggest a different reason.

Note: this is *not* Word of God, It's just a point to consider.

MageOhki wrote: Okay, folks? Let's say Jadis is right.

that exemplar pregancy rate is double.


That means *nothing* As someone pointed out: Stats can be abused. I wouldn't say we are having a Mark Twain moment, here, but another point to consdier: Stats *suggest*.

I'd also point out that a *fair* number of mutants are all in one spot, and ask this:
"Is it the mutation, or is it the location?"

Or more precisely: With Jadis' number being taken as 'accurate' (within one statistical deviation, and in a sample size this small...) How many of those are on Whateley (and before you go "Exemplar condoms!" um... yeah, think back to your teenager days)? I'm not going to say some stats I know about, since it's been a while, but suffice it to say: It's suggestive, but other stats I *do* know about (I'll leave it to the researcher to look at *other* boarding schools) suggest a different reason.

Note: this is *not* Word of God, It's just a point to consider.

Yes.
Ignoring any biological issues ftm, we have a sample sized in a (relatively) small and secluded social environment.
Which would screw things up even more than small sample size for bio issues.
Loads of precedence for this sort of effect in RL

Astrodragon wrote:

MageOhki wrote: Okay, folks? Let's say Jadis is right.

that exemplar pregancy rate is double.


That means *nothing* As someone pointed out: Stats can be abused. I wouldn't say we are having a Mark Twain moment, here, but another point to consdier: Stats *suggest*.

I'd also point out that a *fair* number of mutants are all in one spot, and ask this:
"Is it the mutation, or is it the location?"

Or more precisely: With Jadis' number being taken as 'accurate' (within one statistical deviation, and in a sample size this small...) How many of those are on Whateley (and before you go "Exemplar condoms!" um... yeah, think back to your teenager days)? I'm not going to say some stats I know about, since it's been a while, but suffice it to say: It's suggestive, but other stats I *do* know about (I'll leave it to the researcher to look at *other* boarding schools) suggest a different reason.

Note: this is *not* Word of God, It's just a point to consider.

Yes.
Ignoring any biological issues ftm, we have a sample sized in a (relatively) small and secluded social environment.
Which would screw things up even more than small sample size for bio issues.
Loads of precedence for this sort of effect in RL

well Whateley generally has the more powerful or unique mutants, but regardless another thing that would skew it, is that a statistically significant portion of the mutants population either has had near death experiences or has managed to find themselves in economically advantageous situations, or both, both of these are known to increase birth rates...

Allow me to point to something you all are taking for granted.

What is your definition of mutant?

As has been established, 'Paranormal' has been legally defined in the United States as a person who is 'sufficiently superior from baseline humanity in a meaningfully measurable way'.

Sheila Gail, the protagonist of Fallen Angel has Klinefelter syndrome, so she is genetically XXY, is that your definition of mutant? Is it having a MGC? Is it having an active MGC?

And more importantly, what is the definition of mutant to the people who published the statistic that Jadis quoted? Are they biased? Do they have an agenda?

Things to consider...

Umm, she seems to be talking about Exemplar teen preg rate, only?

Not mutants in general?

crystalhall.fandom.com/wiki/Hercules_Syndrome

E. E. Nalley wrote: And more importantly, what is the definition of mutant to the people who published the statistic that Jadis quoted? Are they biased? Do they have an agenda?

Things to consider...

"THEY will almost certainly outbreed us!"

It's a tale certainly as old as tribalism and racism itself. You see those lines of propaganda all over historical sources of their respective eras, and...even afterward reflecting on previous eras for a subsequent "current" agenda...

...and that's where I will stop before I begin to dip into current real world events because it is a major no-no on the forums.

Maybe the bigger story is that some of Jadis' statements and advanced planning strategies could have been made based on bad data!

Katssun wrote:

E. E. Nalley wrote: And more importantly, what is the definition of mutant to the people who published the statistic that Jadis quoted? Are they biased? Do they have an agenda?

Things to consider...

"THEY will almost certainly outbreed us!"

Wasn't that an issue in the Braeburn report? That is that they at least suspected a higher rate of fertility, also there was a higher than expected (which probably would have been none, but after doing research they established that every year more were happening) rate of mutation which resulted in a male converting to a female. At least that was my take, though it has been a while since I read that particular story.

It's a tale certainly as old as tribalism and racism itself. You see those lines of propaganda all over historical sources of their respective eras, and...even afterward reflecting on previous eras for a subsequent "current" agenda...

...and that's where I will stop before I begin to dip into current real world events because it is a major no-no on the forums.

Maybe the bigger story is that some of Jadis' statements and advanced planning strategies could have been made based on bad data!

Just wait until they factor in parthenogenesis, then the numbers REALLY go up.

Rose Bunny wrote: Just wait until they factor in parthenogenesis, then the numbers REALLY go up.

Or Tia

After all, you know bunnies reputation...

A more interesting question would be the mechanics and outcomes of abortions performed on shifters and regenerators.

Think about that the next time you go to the vet.