Crémieux Profile picture
Sep 23, 2024 7 tweets 3 min read Read on X
The FBI has finally released crime statistics for 2023!

Let's have a short thread.

First thing up is recent violent crime trends: Image
Now let's focus in on homicides.

The homicide statistics split by race show the same distribution they have for years. Image
As with every crime, it's still men doing the killing, but it's also largely men doing the dying. Image
What about Hispanics? Their data is still a mess, but here it is if you're interested. Image
The age-crime curve last year looked pretty typical. How about this year?

Same as always. Victims and offenders still have highly similar, relatively young ages. Image
Everything else, from locations to motives to weapons is pretty similar to previous years. What's different is that the OP might show incorrect numbers.

For the past two years, the FBI has silently updated their numbers after about two weeks.

You can use the web archive to see that the data from the OP is the data shown at release last year, and the data from 2023 is the 2022 data with the FBI's suggested reductions (i.e., -11.6% homicides, -2.8% aggravated assaults, -0.3% robberies, etc.).

But you can see on their site now that they've adjusted the numbers up, so the reduction they suggested has brought us down to a figure that's less impressive than my chart shows. The difference isn't huge so I showed the OP without updating to their new data.

For reference, 2022 as reported then had a homicide rate of 6.3/100k, and they silently updated that to 7.48/100k. The 2023 data they provided today actually has a murder rate of 6.61/100k, higher than last year's initially-reported number, but lower than the updated number. To make matters worse, if you use their Expanded Homicides Report, you get a rate of 5.94 for 2022 and 5.24 for 2023.

Methodology matters and we get to see inconsistency in this year's data, not even data that's been updated or anything. It's a mess, so take everything with a grain of salt and, in the interest of caution, only interpret trends. Trends are mostly common between all data sources even if the absolute magnitudes are off, constantly updated, etc.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Crémieux

Crémieux Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @cremieuxrecueil

May 6
Chinese cities occasionally sell land to developers before buying out all the existing residents.

But sometimes existing residents refuse to be bought out, so developers are forced to build around them.

These are "nail houses"🧵
The most famous nail house is undoubtedly Wu Ping's home in Chongqing.

Wu Ping came to national acclaim when she and her husband refused to give up their property to make way for a luxury apartment complex.

They wanted more compensation, and they fought for it for three years. Image
Wu Ping and her husband refused to leave their property during the debate over the Wuquan Fa, Property Rights Law.

The debate was largely centered around whether and how China would protect property rights given their socialist ideals.Image
Read 18 tweets
May 6
I've seen a lot of people recently claim that the prevalence of vitiligo is 0.5-2%.

This is just not true. In the U.S. today, it's closer to a sixth of a percent, with some notable age- and race-related differences.

But where did the 0.5-2% claim come from?🧵 Image
The claim of a 0.5-2% prevalence emerged on here because Google's Gemini cited a 2020 review in the journal Dermatology which proclaimed as much in the abstract.

Simple enough, right? They must have a source that supports this estimate in the review somewhere.Image
They cite four studies for the 0.5-2% claim, so let's look into those studies. Image
Read 27 tweets
May 2
There's a myth that the Islamic world has figured out fertility, but it has not.

They show the same declining fertility rates that other places have. Barring Iraq, the Middle East has lower fertility rates than Israel now. Image
Exceptions: Yemen and maybe Palestine, both of which have terrible data, so their comparative situation is unclear.

But, two things on that:

Firstly, Jewish fertility is ahead of Arab fertility in Israel. Image
Secondly, Israeli fertility might be just ahead or slightly behind Palestinian fertility, depending on the source.

Israeli growth is definitely ahead of Palestinian growth due to immigration, Palestinian emigration, and Palestinian mortality.Image
Read 6 tweets
May 2
Relationships between class and fertility and IQ and fertility used to routinely be negative in the not-so-distant past.

But across the developed world, they're increasingly positive, albeit only slightly. In this Swedish birth cohort (1951-67), the transition came early: Image
In this example, there's also some interesting confounding: between families, IQ isn't monotonically associated with fertility, but within families, it is.

Something seems to suppress the IQ-fertility relationship between families!

See also:
Sweden's positive IQ-fertility gradient (which, above, is just for males, since it's draftee data), has been around for quite a while (but has varied, too), whereas in countries like France, Japan, and the U.S., the gradient shift towards being slightly positive is more recent. Image
Read 6 tweets
May 2
One of the reasons people are so pessimistic about fertility policy is because they misjudge the counterfactual🧵

Consider this. We have a country with a given fertility level: Image
The country intervenes with some fertility policy, and the fertility rate continues to fall.

The program is therefore dubbed a failure. Oh no! Image
But, had the program never been implemented, the fertility rate would have fallen much more.

This is the counterfactual, and it is roundly ignored in favor of the pessimistic conclusion that fertility policy simply does not work. Image
Read 10 tweets
Apr 30
This is a really strong claim based on really scant evidence.

Add in a control for family history or use Bonferroni instead of Benjamini-Hochberg and 5-aminovaleric acid betaine goes nonsignificant. Add in polygenic risk scores too and Cyclo(Leu-Pro) goes nonsignificant.
Using a small number of the total tests (multiple comparison correction was too lax), the model with both metabolites in it alone led to p-values of 0.3512 for 5-AVAB and 0.0188 for Cyclo(Leu-Pro) and that's from a model without family history or genetic risk.
I don't see any good reason why, but the authors preferred to make inferences from a model missing important controls they had available

But to make matters worse, 5-AVAB wasn't measured super well, and the analyses with cLP were not quantitative at all, as most data was missing
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(