Friday, January 18, 2008

Which Is More Dangerous To Your Health: Al Queda or The Department of Homeland Secuirty?

Good question. Here's an article that can unpack the answer for you:
An intriguing new study suggests the answer is not so clear-cut. Although it’s impossible to calculate the pain that terrorist attacks inflict on victims and society, when statisticians look at cold numbers, they have variously estimated the chances of the average person dying in America at the hands of international terrorists to be comparable to the risk of dying from eating peanuts, being struck by an asteroid or drowning in a toilet.

But worrying about terrorism could be taking a toll on the hearts of millions of Americans. The evidence, published last week in the Archives of General Psychiatry, comes from researchers who began tracking the health of a representative sample of more than 2,700 Americans before September 2001. After the attacks of Sept. 11, the scientists monitored people’s fears of terrorism over the next several years and found that the most fearful people were three to five times more likely than the rest to receive diagnoses of new cardiovascular ailments.
Could it be that all of the W, Rove and Co fear mongering to push their War Machine forward has done more damage to the People of America than Al Queda could have done or dreamed of? I think the answer to that is a "You bethcya." How do we hold the President accountable for that?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Drive 55, stay alive!

During the oil crisis of the early 1970s the government mandated a 55MPH speed limit to save oil and to save lives. Save lives? There is no free lunch, lives were wasted in needlessly lengthened commuting times.

So it is with terror alerts. Logically, the predicted terror level can never fall below yellow (elevated), blue and green are redundant. No politican can risk 'Guarded' or 'Low,' 'Elevated' is as good as it gets. More people will die from high blood pressure cause by DHS alarmism than will be saved from terrorists.