In a page-one story on sharply rising suicide rates in middle-aged Americans, Tara Parker-Pope blames "years of economic worry and easy access to prescription painkillers" for making baby boomers particularly vulnerable.
From 1999 to 2010, she reports, "the suicide rate among Americans ages 35 to 64 rose by nearly 30 percent, to 17.6 deaths per 100,000 people, up from 13.7," and "the most profound increases were seen among men in their 50s, among whom suicide rates jumped by nearly 50 percent, to about 30 per 100,000."
Before we get to the speculation about the reasons for this, let's look at the numbers. Why write "nearly 30 percent" when it's shorter and more accurate to write "28.4 percent," which is what the CDC reported in last Friday's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report?
To pump up the magnitude of the increase, perhaps? "Nearly 30 percent" sounds like a third, while "28.4 percent" sounds more like a quarter.
And while a rise of "nearly 30 percent" sounds huge, let's consider the absolute numbers. The difference between the suicide rates in 1999 and 2010 is that in 2010 three more individuals in every 100,000 committed suicide. Doesn't the rise seem much smaller now? The fact is, suicides are rare among this group. Even with a rise of 28.4 percent, they are still rare; suicide now occurs in 1.76 hundredths of one percent of middle-aged Americans.
Parker-Pope accurately reports what the CDC said, and if the CDC reported the figures, it's safe to say that they think the figures are significant even if they are very small. But is this important enough to make the front page?
My guess is that this story made the front page not because of the numbers, but because of the explanation that Parker-Pope supplied: Baby boomers are increasingly being driven to suicide by a tough economy and drug abuse. A heck of a story, and an easy call for page one, if true. But is it?
After Parker-Pope recites the CDC's numbers, she writes that "the reasons for suicide are complex, and officials and researchers acknowledge that no one can explain with certainty what is beyond the rise." Parker-Pope interviews a CDC official who says the increase in suicide "does coincide with a decrease in financial standing for a lot of families over the same time period."
Note what the CDC official does not say: She does not say that the drop in financial standing caused the suicides.
And what about the notion that prescription painkillers may be a cause? Parker-Pope backs that up with this: "Another factor may be the widespread availability of opioid drugs like OxyContin and oxycodone, which can be particularly deadly in large doses."
Read closely, Parker-Pope's lede could be accurate, but it doesn't say as much as it seems to: She writes that there is "concern" that economic worry and painkillers "may" have made baby boomers vulnerable to self-inflicted harm. The use of "concern" and "may" doubly insulate her from responsibility for what most readers are taking away from this: Money troubles and drugs are driving baby boomers to suicide.
According to the National Institute of Mental Health, one of the most common causes of suicide is a word that does not appear in her story: depression. If Parker-Pope was going to speculate on the causes of the rise in suicide, she could have looked at many other things including, say, the availability of treatment for depression, and whether there is "concern" that the increase in the number of uninsured "may" have been responsible for the rise in suicides.
-Paul Raeburn
Leave a Reply