# Odds of dying greater for a civilian in the US than a soldier in Iraq? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 4, 2005, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549 "2005-11-04T21:15:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/1 "2005-11-04T21:15:41Z")
I overheard a coworker of mine talking, and his son just signed up for the Army. His son told him that a civilian in the US actually has greater odds of dying than a soldier in Iraq, based on how many soldiers are over there vs. how many have been killed. Is this actually true? It sounds like a lie from a recruiter to me. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/2 "2005-11-04T21:19:48Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > I overheard a coworker of mine talking, and his son just signed up for the Army. His son told him that a civilian in the US actually has greater odds of dying than a soldier in Iraq, based on how many soldiers are over there vs. how many have been killed. > > Is this actually true? It sounds like a lie from a recruiter to me. It might be true if you compare soldiers to all civilians in the U.S. disregadrding age and health. But there are very few (none?) soldiers in Iraq dying of old age, cancer, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Hampshire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hampshire/32/4887_2.png) [@Hampshire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hampshire)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/3 "2005-11-04T21:27:43Z")
> [@OldGuy](#): > > It might be true if you compare soldiers to all civilians in the U.S. disregadrding age and health. But there are very few (none?) soldiers in Iraq dying of old age, cancer, etc. I’d agree. The ratio of U.S. citizens to daily U.S. deaths may be worse that U.S. troops in Iraq to daily death rate of U.S. troops in Iraq. However, if you only counted U.S. deaths that were results of accidents and murders Iraq would be a worse off place. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/4 "2005-11-04T21:45:56Z")
Another way to think of it is like this – you have roughly 140,000 soldiers in Iraq. They are, for the most part, young and healthy. We’ll lose about 660 of them a year, at current rates, due to enemy action. Now, if those 140,000 soldiers were home, would you lose 660 in a year? You would not. Check out [this site](http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm) for the odds of dying in a given year from any form of accident – car accident, murder, fall from a horse, etc. By my reckoning, of a population of 140,000, at most about 80 would die by accident in a year. Throw in a few more for mortality due to illness, and you’d still be a long way from 660. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/5 "2005-11-04T22:04:49Z")
My rough calculation: Annual odds of dying in Iraq: 2000 deaths/150,000 troops (on average)/2.7 years = \*\*0.5% \*\* Annual odds of dying in the U.S. from [the CDC](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/05facts/lifeexpectancy.htm) 840 deaths/100,000 people/1 year = \*\*0.84% \*\* So you’re about 1.7 times more likely to die in the U.S. _BUT_ that’s not adjusted for age. Let’s try to ballpark the effect of age. The average age of the troops in Iraq that I could find was 27 years. The annual likelihood of dying in the U.S. if you’re 25-34 (from the CDC again) 102.2/100,000 people/1 year = \*\* 0.1% \*\* This isn’t a great way to adjust for age, but it’s the best I can do with the information I’ve got - and it suggests that for your age, you’re about 5 times more likely to die in Iraq than in the U.S. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/6 "2005-11-04T22:11:22Z")
According to Table no. 95 in [Vital Statistics](http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/vitstat.pdf) from Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2004-2005, the recent death rate in the U.S. is about 8.5 per 1,000. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2005, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/7 "2005-11-04T22:53:25Z")
Our own **Airman Doors** made a similar argument in [his thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=268641&page=1&pp=50) about Michael Moore’s _Fahrenheit 9/11_, although his point of comparison was specifically auto accidents. He said, in post #89: > [@Airman Doors](#): > > Just to illustrate the point, we have lost to this day 909 people in Iraq, 129 more if we add Afghanistan. Add another 128 for Desert Storm, a few hundred for a myriad of reasons, and a few hundred more for accidents (crashes, 9/11, etc.), and let’s just say that it’s 4,000 people dead since 1979 (we’ll start with Desert One, and yes, the number is probably lowball). 45,000 people die yearly in car accidents. So statistically, you’re safer being in the military for your entire career including occupying a hostile country for well over a year than you are driving a car daily. It’s a small consolation to those who have died, but it’s a risk that we all take, and a small one at that. In reply, **monstro** pointed out, in post #99: > [@monstro](#): > > Your argument is embarrassingly faulty. How many people ride and drive in cars in the US? About 300 million? How does that compare to the number of soldiers who have fought in Iraq and Afganistan? > > 909 soldiers would still be alive if not for this ill-begotten war. > > Your argument screams in the face of reason and common sense, not to mention belittling the sacrifice of people who have died serving their country (which I know is unintentional). > > _Color me confused for why you felt the need to go all the way back to 1979 to make your argument. Recruiters are bringing in soldiers for current and future involvements. It would not be wise for a guy to sign up for the military based on “peacetime” fatality rates from twenty-five years ago. They’d be wise to look at what’s happening now. Now ain’t looking too good._ And **Hentor the Barbarian** added, in post #103: > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > Oh, **Airman Doors**! The denominator is your friend! Why would you abuse it so? > > From [The NHTSA](http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/TSF2002Final.pdf) we get the statistics for 2002: fatalities=42,815, licensed drivers=194,295,633. We’ll take the numbers just for Iraq, since I can’t find the stats through a brief check for Iraq and Afghanistan. Troops=130,000, fatalities=909. > > Here is a handy calculator for odds ratios: [http://www.hutchon.freeserve.co.uk/ConfidOR.htm](http://www.hutchon.freeserve.co.uk/ConfidOR.htm). > > What you find is that, comparing the number of drivers in 2002 with troops in Iraq, the soldier in Iraq is 31.77 times more likely to be killed than an American driver. > > If you had stats for the number of fatalities among the number of members of the armed forces from 1979-2004, and the number of fatalities among the number of car drivers during that time, you could also calculate the odds ratio for that comparison. I suspect, however, that the greater risk will continue to be found among the service members. It is a risky job, hence the debt of gratitude that we owe members of the armed forces. It’s a bit of a surprise that you would argue otherwise. And i entered the fray in post #107 with similar observations to **monstro** and **Hentor** : > [@mhendo](#): > > Just wanted to add to **monstro** ’s point here. > > According to [this site](http://www.geocities.com/pwhce/willing.html) the United States had 130,000 troops in Iraq in March 2004. It’s the only statistic i could find for over US troop numbers, so it’s the one i’m going to use. If anyone has better or more complete figures, i’d be happy to see them. > > Now, it been 16 months since the invasion began, and in that time, according to **Airman Doors** , the US has lost 909 troops in Iraq. So, over 16 months the losses are 909/130,000. > > Now, we want the figures for a one-year period, so we multiply this by 12/16. This gives us a figure of about 755/130,000, or about 5.8 deaths per 1,000 troops per year. > > Now, **Airman** tells us that 45,000 people die each year on America’s road. I’m happy enough to accept that figure. Total population of the United States is about 280 million. So, 45,000/280,000,000 gives us 1/6222, or about 0.16 deaths per 1000 Americans. > > Even if we use only **licensed** drivers, we find that in the year 2000, there were about [190 million licensed drivers](http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/onh2p4.htm) in the United States. This makes driving appear slightly more dangerous, with final figures of about 0.24 deaths per 1000 drivers. > > So, let’s review the figures: > > US soldiers in Iraq: 5.8 deaths per 1000 soldiers per year > > Americans on the road: 0.16 deaths per 1000 population per year > > Americans with drivers’ licenses: 0.24 deaths per 1000 drivers per year > > So, a soldier in Iraq is somewhere between 24 and 36 times more likely to die in Iraq than an American on our nation’s roads. I see, on preview, that **Hentor** arrived at a figure of 31.77. Pretty close to my numbers. > > Furthermore, **Airman** ’s “statistics” try to take us all the way back to 1979. But what he gorgets is that, during periods of peace, when American troops are not stationed in hostile territory, they are subject to the same risk of traffic accidents as the rest of the population. Correct me if i’m wrong, **Airman** , but i believe that you served much of your time in the armed forces right here in America? In which case, you probably ran the same risk of being in a car accident as any other American. As i suggested in that thread, this is not simply an either/or situation. For those serving in Iraq, you have to _add_ the possibility that they will be killed by an act related to the occupation (enemy fire, friendly fire, insurgent suicide bomb, etc., etc.) to the regular, run-of-the-mill possibilities of death. Also, as others have suggested here, you have to compare the death rate in Iraq not to the overall US death rate, but to the death rate of those with similar demographic indicators as those serving in Iraq. Most of those in Iraq are relatively young, healthy folks who have, in most cases, been cleared by the military of any ailments and afflictions that would likely impede their abilities or cause them serious health concerns. If you look at the death rate among similarly young, healthy folks here in the US, i suggest that it’s probably rather lower than the death rate among US troops in Iraq. Most fundamentally, you have to ask: Of all the people who have served in Iraq since the start of the war, how many would likely be dead if the war had never started? Would it likely be fewer than 2,000 people? ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/8 "2005-11-05T00:32:01Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > If you look at the death rate among similarly young, healthy folks here in the US, i suggest that it’s probably rather lower than the death rate among US troops in Iraq. I showed that above already I think. It’s around five times lower. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/9 "2005-11-05T00:45:23Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > I showed that above already I think. It’s around five times lower. Indeed you did. And your figures, as i’m sure you realize, don’t even take account of the fact that members of the armed forces are probably, on the whole, fitter and healthier than the average for their age group. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/10 "2005-11-05T01:26:25Z")
The Army’s Combat Readiness Center claims that right now 1 soldier dies every 9 hours. If we subtract the combat deaths, that’s still a shit load of young healthy people dying back home. Most of those are caused by driving POVs, drinking, or just “blowing off steam” - which I think includes sports and extreme sports fatalities. Not really making a point. Just thought someone could use the 1 every 9 hours for an anual statistic and maybe subtract the soldier deaths in Iraq (remember just Army) and see what we come up with for a % chance of a soldier dying in Iraq vs dying in the US. I think it would be the most accurate comparisson. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/11 "2005-11-05T01:31:29Z")
Oh… and training. Don’t know how I forgot to mention training. Many of those fatalities are from soldiers dying while training. So I think whatever number we’d come up with doing the math above, it wont be accurate to compare to civilians. But it will say how, if you’re in the Army already, how much your chance of death is actually increased by going to Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/12 "2005-11-05T02:59:10Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > And your figures, as i’m sure you realize, don’t even take account of the fact that members of the armed forces are probably, on the whole, fitter and healthier than the average for their age group. Maybe. But they’re also on the whole from lower socioeconomic groups too, I think. Which I’d expect would have an impact in the other direction. Overall I’m happier with just ballparking by age and acknowledging that that only gives you a rough idea, but nevertheless clearly shows a far higher likelihood of death in Iraq, on the order of at least several times the likehood of death in the U.S. **Bear\_Nenno** - can you provide a cite for your data point? I’m not sure exactly what 1 death every 9 hours is referring to. ---
**Author:** ![uglybeech](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/82dd89/32.png) [@uglybeech](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/uglybeech)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/13 "2005-11-05T03:15:53Z")
Oh, and another issue, **mhendo** , is that there are more men in Iraq and men ordinarily have something like twice the death rates in that age group as women (translation: men can’t take care of themselves 😛 ). So that would also tend to cancel out any better health effect. ---
**Author:** ![R.P.McMurphy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7993a0/32.png) [@R.P.McMurphy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/R.P.McMurphy)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/14 "2005-11-05T12:50:53Z")
If we were to follow your coworker’s (il)logic then we would send all of our old and sick citizens over to Iraq because, according to the stats, they would have less chance of dying. That makes sense, doesn’t it? This is another example of using bogus, incomplete information to manipulate people’s attitudes and decisions. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2005, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/15 "2005-11-05T14:24:20Z")
> [@Bear\_Nenno](#): > > The Army’s Combat Readiness Center claims that right now 1 soldier dies every 9 hours This has the same problem that has been pointed out several times: the number of deaths per hour among a group of 150,000 people is way different from the number of deaths per hour among a group of 300,000,000 people. **Revtim** , by the same argument, it’s safer to be a teenage drunk driver than to be an ordinary citizen. The same demographic non-comparability would apply. So, we got a gummint representative misusing statistics? How astounding. ---
**Author:** ![Bear\_Nenno](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bear_nenno/32/3358_2.png) [@Bear\_Nenno](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bear_Nenno)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/16 "2005-11-06T09:47:53Z")
> [@uglybeech](#): > > **Bear\_Nenno** - can you provide a cite for your data point? I’m not sure exactly what 1 death every 9 hours is referring to. [https://crc.army.mil/readiness/](https://crc.army.mil/readiness/) Not sure if it will work without login and password, but I think it should. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2005, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odds-of-dying-greater-for-a-civilian-in-the-us-than-a-soldier-in-iraq/329549/17 "2005-11-06T14:38:09Z")
**Revtim** : I’m curious if you have given these statistics to your co-worker. On one hand, I support fighting ingorance. On the other hand it you were to offer the information unbidden, you’d probably piss him off.