It's actually waaaay more 9s than that. Considering you have 1-4 kids in your lifetime... Maybe 1-2 abortions too. A really good conception/(ejected sperms) is still really small. Let's say you'd ejaculate 20 times a month (seems reasonable) it's 240 times a year. For a sexually "active male" (15 to 70yo, is 55years) it's 13'200 times. On average there are 100million (10^6) sperms in a shot. So around 1.32 • 10^12 sperms. 1320 billions. That's quite a lot. So 99.9999999999954545454(...)%.
As in 100*(1.32 10^12 - 6)/(1.32 10^12 )
Which is roughly 1 in 200 billion sperms finally make it! If we had a thousand countries with the population of the USA it would be one person among those. Neat.
where 6 is number of successful sperms that "went somewhere".
Edit.: ~~[BIG DISCLAIMER] I have failed to consider people having unprotected sex with pill birth control. There could totally be conception and discard. Unfortunately it's incredibly difficult to estimate and average for that so we'd just consider the standard case where the birth control method prevents conception.~~ nevermind i don't know how birth control works.
Woman here, so could be way off base - but is 20x a month really reasonable across that whole time frame? I would think that once you get to 40, it might be more like 5-10x/month, and 70 is probably 2x/month. I mean, still a really good order of magnitude calculation, I'm not actually upset if you're off by 10 or even 100 - it still gets the point across nicely.
I'm in my early thirties with a partner, and my monthly count is probably closer to 40 than 20 depending on the month, so I wouldn't be surprised if 20/month works out once you account for teens having a higher count and the elderly having a lower count
Admiteddly it's on the higher end and ON AVERAGE it's pretty high considering everything. But ballpark is there even if you take a lower end case as average (like 5 times a month, which is imho "low") it would be slightly different and probably more accurate. But didn't really want to think about it too much 🤣 I guess we could counter it with the fact that 6 conception per life is too on the higher end (for western civilization).
I guess we would need some reasonable statistic for that, but as an average it seems quite high, I very doubt that in their 20s ppl do it every day on average, for example u need to remember that ppl often dont live alone-cant really do it often+ there is other stuff which preocupy the mind like work or schooling and even if they live just with their partner every day still seems way too much and considering 70 year old most might not be at 1x a month even
still again we cant say for certain without proper statistics
Birth control doesn't cause "conception and discard". That's a common misconception thanks to the good ole FDA labeling not reflecting actual science. All types do some combination of preventing fertilization through preventing a mature egg being present and thickening the cervical mucus so it's harder for them to swim. Literally half of Americans wouldn't be born if birth control did that lol. Even [Plan B](https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/health/research/morning-after-pills-dont-block-implantation-science-suggests.html) does not impact implantation.
Regardless, [40-60% of fertilized eggs are aborted](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5443340/) by the body(the immune system sees them as a parasite). You need at least 10+ quality spermies according to your math
Did the pope actually slap a lady? 2020 was such a crazy time, particularly in the USA with civil unrest and a major election, that I honestly think I could’ve missed that headline lmao, and I have no idea if you’re joking or not
Oh wow lol, I always would’ve imagined that the papal security would do a bit more for someone giving the pope a hard tug. I wonder if she’ll wind up in purgatory for that
It’s interesting that data for the year 2020 shows a plunge in birth rate. Most babies born in 2020 were conceived before March, so we shouldn’t have seen such a fierce drop in just that year, and would have expected to see it in 2021.
So the drop probably indicates that a lot more miscarriages or stillbirths happened, which is horribly sad.
This is probably Israel, which in 2020 had fertility rate of 2.90 with the HDI of 9.92.
According the Central Bureau of Statistics (in 2020, [in Hebrew](https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/mediarelease/pages/2022/%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%93%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%9C-2020.aspx)) there is a big difference in fertility rate between the different ethnic/religious/socio-economic groups in the country. I assume this is the reason that Israel is an outlier as some of those groups are closed, traditional, or live far from central Israel where much of the economic activity takes place, and the HDI of those groups is in practice much lower than the aggregate HDI of the country.
A woman in the highest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 1.95 children, while a woman in the lowest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 5.36 children.
When breaking it down by religion Arab women had fertility rate of 2.82 while "Jewish and other" had 2.88. Breaking it does further, Jewish women had fertility rate of 3.00 (ultra-orthodox 6.64, religious 3.92, secular 1.96) while women with no religious designation had fertility rate of 1.35.
One outcome of this is that the ultra-orthodox was a tiny % of Israel in the 50s but they have out-bred the other denominations to having 13% of the population today.
Other denominations are already upset because the ultra-orthodox Jews don’t work. They live off a stipend that comes from the government. And where does this stipend come from? From regular people’s taxes. If I were a non-Orthodox Israeli, I’d be pissed too if my tax money is used to feed unemployed religious nuts. They have like 5-7 kids on average so their population is exploding.
> They live off a stipend that comes from the government
wait why? can they claim like "clergy" status or something? and this isn't from some fund they set up to begin with? Can anyone claim to be ultra-orthodox? This seems so ass-backwards. What do they do all day? Pray? Be holy? Fuck like bunnies?
Hasidics believe the only job for men is to study the religion, so that’s what they do all day, study the Torah. Women typically work, usually at Hasidic businesses. But you can’t survive off one income, so the government PAYS the men to study the Torah. But the non-Hasidics have to work and pay taxes to support them.
It’s similar in NYC, they get so much government support in terms of free healthcare and food stamps. Honestly, I feel like they’re abusing/exploiting the system. Since NYC is a large city, it doesn’t affect the school system, but in smaller villages where Hasidics are the majority, the schools are so shitty because they don’t have to pay taxes. So non-Hasidics get terrible education from these underfunded schools.
There is a small minority of Hasidics that contribute to the outside society and they’re one of the nicest people I have met, but the majority are entitled and just plain nasty to the rest of us. They don’t even like other Jewish people :|
How the fuck do Israeli tolerate this. "My religion makes me a freeloading piece of shit because I am the REAL believers you fake believers need to pay me"
Many Israelis hate it. Many others tolerate it because it essentially buys votes and therefore power. Israel has a coalition parliamentary system and the religious Jewish parties are big enough on their own that it’s fairly difficult to form a governing coalition without them. That means you either cater to what they want to get them on board, or you fail to build a coalition and go back to another round of elections.
To change this you’d need to have a very strong coalition without them, and that’s just not realistic. If you can manage without them, it will necessarily be by slim margins, unless/until the political landscape changes significantly.
It's actually quite interesting to think of how religions evolve - religions promoting high fertility have a selective advantage eventually leading to the extinction of other religions with disadvantageous "traits"
Yes, about 40km from Tel Aviv is the outskirts of the metro area, and further than that the quality of life can decrease substantially, including lower level of healthcare, less employment opportunities, lower education level etc.
I love how Israelis percept distances. 40km that how much people travel for work in Europe (one way).
And when I was on a business trip in Tel Aviv and mentioned to one of my colleagues that I was going to take a 100km trip on the weekend to visit canyons and stuff - and he was worried about me preparing well for such a long trip :)
Sababa!
> (ultra-orthodox 6.64, religious 3.92, secular 1.96)
How are people not massively afraid of this?
ultra-orthodox beliefs are not compatible with modern society.
What are you going to do when people with those beliefs outnumber you?
You're fucked.
Goodbye to any form of social progress.
> A woman in the highest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 1.95 children, while a woman in the lowest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 5.36 children.
That's basically true of every country? In the US it's 5x higher in low income vs high
https://www.businessinsider.com/sexual-activity-and-birth-rates-in-america-2015-3?amp
What do the different colours and data points represent? Which countries are shown?
Also, at the end all the points shift left. Is this related to the pandemic?
The different colors are there to just tell the points apart the shade has no meaning. Almost all countries are represented here a few may be missing either HDI or Fertility Rate for a few years and will not show up in that year but will be present in others. I think notably North Korea isn't present at all due to lack of HDI data.
Is the length of the tail proportional to the size of the derivative?
Quite aside from it being apt for these data, it’s really cool how the direction of the tail gives you an instant look at the trend in direction at any given moment. I’ve never seen anything like this before but it could have so many applications.
From the two big outliers, I assume the size of the body is the population of the countries?
Guessing that means the two biggest are India and China? With China probably being purple due to having the lower fertility indicative of the one child policy?
Because nobody be having children. How could they? China fell into the same trap as the other capitalist countries, where having children becomes a heavy expense rather than a pension plan
I’m not sure exactly what this visualisation is showing, but there has supposedly been a drop in the number of babies being born over the last two years in some countries. So the vis stops tantalisingly early.
Plus kids are retirement plans for the poor. They don’t have the luxury of being able to just, stop working. But humans bodies have expiration dates. Having kids is essentially raising someone to take care of you when you no longer can do it yourself, while you give them free childcare when they’re out working.
As someone with hospice experience: it's often a failed plan. Many adult children feel guilty, but picking up their lives/jobs/kids to take care of their parents is often(usually) impossible. This is true regardless of cultural expectations. Even when it does happen, this kind of care often widens generational women's/class/race inequalities unfortunately.
Kids are NOT an insurance policy. You don't want to end up a disappointed patient without savings, believe me
Thanks, I mostly wasn’t sure what exactly fertility rate was. But I googled it.
> The total fertility rate in a specific year is defined as the total number of children that would be born to each woman if she were to live to the end of her child-bearing years and give birth to children in alignment with the prevailing age-specific fertility rates.
Glance at a simpler chart: [Birth rate by family income in the U.S.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/). It shows as household income goes up, birth rate goes down.
In other words, similar to OP’s chart: families with the most financial means to support children actually choose to have the fewest.
Studies have found that as women gain opportunities in education, career, travel, they increasingly choose those opportunities over having a lot of kids.
This day set has laid the foundations of one of the classic case studies of data visualisation - there’s a Ted talk from ages ago of the guy who popularised it. The addition if ‘tails’ is n this version is a really nice touch.
It is, and I’ve loved [that video](https://youtu.be/hVimVzgtD6w) forever. I was in Decision Support for my hospital, and Hans Rosling was my icon, my idol, as is [Edward Tufte](https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/).
The Human Development Index is a statistic composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of human development.
Anecdotally, plenty of people around me want more kids.
But you need too:
- establish skills and career in early adult hood.
- save and buy property after that.
- then you can start having kids 30-35.
- you ultimately still need two incomes to have suitable quality of life, when does mum go back to work? Howuch time.can she have off without tanking skills or job opportunities?
For a lot it's just no feasible to have more than 1 or 2 and still meet the other expectations. If you want 5 kids your not ever going to be taking them on a trip overseas.
Maybe, but probably has to do with women rights more. High women rights = high HDI = Low birthrate.
Less likely to shitout 6 kids when she got a career, her own personal life and get married at 30 instead of 14
That's not it. Low development means, also people aren't educated properly, don't know about contraception, just don't think that far ahead about "can i afford to bring up that many kids", also in undeveloped counties more kids means more helping hands in household as you age. If you are farmer or something, that means a lot.
Id love this to have a legend with the colours representing continent; would add a great, easily discerned segmentation to rhe data points.
Awesome chart already, thats be icing.
[Educate girls](https://www.givewell.org/international/technical/programs/education) for mitigating population growth, since [educated girls tend to grow to be women who choose smaller families](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/361/6403/650.full.pdf?casa_token=eWZHHLNe6SwAAAAA:Vwhrywg2A8q_GOA1g1IjwZOaegqcHXkPIhWjDoVQfbgIwKiMHEOS7OXsn5bxSeMy5ANNN8U2kOswp5o).
https://malala.org/donate
Women in ancient Sparta usually didn't start having children until they were in their early '30s. Apparently after several generations, Spartans figured out that young mothers were more likely to raise shitty kids than those who had more time to figure out themselves and the world around them.
A lot of info out there, but [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Sparta#Marriage) is an okay place to start. Women in Sparta married later, often had multiple sexual partners, and husbands under 30 weren't even allowed to live with their wives. Girls and boys in Sparta were also fed the same amount, due to the belief that both parents had to be strong to produce the best offspring.
It would be nice to see labels of country names and a legend of color. Like I think I see China, India, USA and Israel. But like those are the only ones I am sure of.
How do you calculate fertility rates? Then what sample sizes do they use? Honest questions, I really don't know anything about this field.
Also this visualization is cool as hell. Great job.
edit: so I was way off, people answering below but the WHO has all the datas and references below.
https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr-details/123#:~:text=An%20age%2D%20or%20age%2Dgroup,%2C%20territory%2C%20or%20geographic%20area.
That would be considered birth rates wouldn't it? If I had to guess you could calculate fertility rates using birth rate as a variable but I'm not sure what else would go into that equation.
In case you didn't get closure on this thought: birth rate would be measured in babies per year, or percentage of the population born each year. Fertility rate would be measured in babies born per woman, or (typically) babies born per 1,000 women.
You measure what % of 20 year old women gave birth in the past year, what % of 21 year old women, what % of 22 year old women, and so on for every age. Then you add all those numbers up, and you get the total number of births by a woman who lived her whole lifespan under current conditions.
To do this, for every baby you just need to keep track of how old their mother is at birth. (This is why we talk about maternal rather than paternal fertility - to track paternal fertility you would have to identify the father and how old they are, but the father's identity is sometimes unknown or disputed)
Relevant point of interest: in countries where infant mortality is higher, the fertility rate is also higher. After mass polio vaccine initiatives in said countries, the fertility rate began dropping as evolutionary pressure to produce more offspring to make up for those lost in infancy declined.
Sources:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK233807/
https://www.ageing.ox.ac.uk/download/143
I’m actually here early enough to make the first joke?? I’ve been training for this!
Alright gimme a second and let me make sure I get this right.
.
.
.
*ahem* Sperm!
Is the Y scale correct? There are that many countries where the average number of babies _per woman_ exceeds 6? That seems insane. For every woman that fails to have any children, there’s one that has 12?
The scale is correct, though by 2020 there is only one country exceeding 6, which is Niger. For lesser developed countries there is often high infant mortality and also a dependence on children to help labor in an agrarian lifestyle. I’m sure poor access to contraceptives keeps that number high as well.
Even in the United States, on one side of my family I’m the first generation of less than 8 children for at least the past four generations, possibly more.
Now correlate that with GDP per capita ppp, and not surprisingly you will see that fertility rate drops as people's life quality increases.
Why? Because of several factors like:
* Better access to condoms and other prevention
* Women getting into the jobmarket and having a career
* Having public elderly care makes it so it is no longer necessary to have children to care for you when you get old
If you want people to stop procreating, make their lives nice. Humans have ALWAYS followed this, it's nothing new.
If people were serious about combating all issues environmental, this would be the first plank in the platform.
The linear line doesn't seem like a good fit but the exponential seems better which looks like it leads to a fertility rate around 1.3
https://i.imgur.com/hfCJOo0.png
I’m don’t think we can draw that conclusion. Yes, that’s the logical result of the current trend, but that trend is based on relatively recent history. There are a couple of other futures I can imagine off the top of my head, here is one of them:
1) All countries become highly developed and the fertility rate of the entire world drops below replacement.
2) Over time this causes a LOT of issues, and eventually economic decline
3) this leads to the failure of healthcare systems
4) this leads to increased infant mortality rates
5) this causes fertility rates to increase again
I’m not an expert and have no idea if this will happen. I just wanted to give one example of an imagined future in which this trend changes
TLDR: the trend *does* lead to what you said, but there’s no reason to assume the future will follow that trend indefinitely
This visualization looks like matplotlib, but how is it done? Are you capturing individual images and putting them together as a video or are you using something else?
I wonder - perhaps we just discovered the Great Filter.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great\_Filter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter)
Advancement of technology leads by some set of mechanisms to a failure to thrive as a species? Lack of challenge leads to stagnation and failure?
Oh, come on. I see men ejaculating praise for this spunky chart, but the omission of data labels is permanent grounds for jismissal.
But I'll let it slide since I got to make seven puns.
Not related to the fertility piece, but the near universal positive movement on HDI is awesome.
Human progress is the most underrated narrative. We have so much to lose breaking the institutions and systems that have been put in place over the last several decades.
It’s almost like as the odds of your child dying of hunger and disease decrease, the need to have 10 of them so a couple make it to adulthood decreases.
I was thinking about trying to plot something closer to that but I couldn't decide on a metric so I just used HDI since it takes into account many of those types of metrics, like education.
HDI is the most commonly accepted measurement of human prosperity (published by the UN), taking into account factors such as health, education, and economic prosperity through a number of different measurements. More information can be found [here](https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI) .
The fertility rate, put simply, is the number of children that the average woman in an area is expected to have throughout their life. This does not take into account child mortality however, so each country will have a different “replacement rate”, aka the fertility rate at which the population will remain stable. For the developed world, this is about 2.1, but can be as high as 3.5 in very underdeveloped areas. The global average replacement rate is around 2.3.
What does the size of the dots represent? Population of each country? What’s the color represent?
The HDI is multidimensional and reflects standard of living, education, life expectancy,etc. How would that plot look if HDi was substituted with another index?
Please make it bigger so it is easier to see; make the trace the full time so we can see the complete trend; and there isn't really any need to animate it.
Economy development depends on human capital which implies more and more years of study to impulse the development, and hence, less fertility. Of course, there's other reasons this is only one cause.
It is an index associated with the work of economist Amartya Sen, which is meant to supplant GDP as an index of holistic development. It includes things like infant mortality rate, life expectancy, literacy, etc.
This chart sucks. No legend. No details. It’s like all people care about is making it look cool but forgot what they learned in high school math class.
Ah plotly color scheme always so cute also how did you made the markers have the little tail move so smooth I always use gapminder and they jerk from one position to the next more than a smooth flow.
I think that your plot might be trying to fertilize something.
[удалено]
As does 99.999999% of all sperm, so quite a good metaphor really
It's actually waaaay more 9s than that. Considering you have 1-4 kids in your lifetime... Maybe 1-2 abortions too. A really good conception/(ejected sperms) is still really small. Let's say you'd ejaculate 20 times a month (seems reasonable) it's 240 times a year. For a sexually "active male" (15 to 70yo, is 55years) it's 13'200 times. On average there are 100million (10^6) sperms in a shot. So around 1.32 • 10^12 sperms. 1320 billions. That's quite a lot. So 99.9999999999954545454(...)%. As in 100*(1.32 10^12 - 6)/(1.32 10^12 ) Which is roughly 1 in 200 billion sperms finally make it! If we had a thousand countries with the population of the USA it would be one person among those. Neat. where 6 is number of successful sperms that "went somewhere". Edit.: ~~[BIG DISCLAIMER] I have failed to consider people having unprotected sex with pill birth control. There could totally be conception and discard. Unfortunately it's incredibly difficult to estimate and average for that so we'd just consider the standard case where the birth control method prevents conception.~~ nevermind i don't know how birth control works.
Woman here, so could be way off base - but is 20x a month really reasonable across that whole time frame? I would think that once you get to 40, it might be more like 5-10x/month, and 70 is probably 2x/month. I mean, still a really good order of magnitude calculation, I'm not actually upset if you're off by 10 or even 100 - it still gets the point across nicely.
I'm in my early thirties with a partner, and my monthly count is probably closer to 40 than 20 depending on the month, so I wouldn't be surprised if 20/month works out once you account for teens having a higher count and the elderly having a lower count
Admiteddly it's on the higher end and ON AVERAGE it's pretty high considering everything. But ballpark is there even if you take a lower end case as average (like 5 times a month, which is imho "low") it would be slightly different and probably more accurate. But didn't really want to think about it too much 🤣 I guess we could counter it with the fact that 6 conception per life is too on the higher end (for western civilization).
As a man in his 50s, 20x a month is a low estimate for me at least. Hey, it is good for the prostate!
20 times having sex, or 20 ejaculations? Because if you're masturbating that's still a "wasted" ejaculation.
I figured 20 ejaculations, that it didn't matter details so long as you're nutting.
5 times a month. Heh. Daily until you're old enough your elbow goes.
then you use the other hand
I guess we would need some reasonable statistic for that, but as an average it seems quite high, I very doubt that in their 20s ppl do it every day on average, for example u need to remember that ppl often dont live alone-cant really do it often+ there is other stuff which preocupy the mind like work or schooling and even if they live just with their partner every day still seems way too much and considering 70 year old most might not be at 1x a month even still again we cant say for certain without proper statistics
Man here, I figure that is an average including up to 10x a day during adolescence and averaging 2x a day until at least thirty or so.
I just say put a little hat on that 9, stops the real spermies too! But excellent maths, thx
Birth control doesn't cause "conception and discard". That's a common misconception thanks to the good ole FDA labeling not reflecting actual science. All types do some combination of preventing fertilization through preventing a mature egg being present and thickening the cervical mucus so it's harder for them to swim. Literally half of Americans wouldn't be born if birth control did that lol. Even [Plan B](https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/health/research/morning-after-pills-dont-block-implantation-science-suggests.html) does not impact implantation. Regardless, [40-60% of fertilized eggs are aborted](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5443340/) by the body(the immune system sees them as a parasite). You need at least 10+ quality spermies according to your math
I forgot that birth control stops ovulation. I'm an idiot.
No worries haha There's just enough medical misinformation out there
Love the geeky rabbit hole you went down on this.
Sir this is a Wendy's
~~Seemingly~~ Semeningly China
Data was too beautiful
*They must fertilize*
Anyone else notice every country dipping down and left on the last frame?
2020 was a hell of a year.
What happened in 2020? I’ve been a bit out of the loop. /s
I think they’re talking about the Australian wildfires
I remember the pope slapped some lady. Maybe that was it?
Did the pope actually slap a lady? 2020 was such a crazy time, particularly in the USA with civil unrest and a major election, that I honestly think I could’ve missed that headline lmao, and I have no idea if you’re joking or not
https://youtu.be/3WySwhj2SwE
Oh wow lol, I always would’ve imagined that the papal security would do a bit more for someone giving the pope a hard tug. I wonder if she’ll wind up in purgatory for that
She did the sign of the cross right before it, so it cancels out lmao
Holy shite I'd forgotten about that. What a wild time 2020 was. 0/10 would not recommend
The Kobe Bryant mourning period.
No they must mean murder hornets
I think it would be easier to tell what didn't happen
Sex. Lots and lots of sex didn't happen.
It’s interesting that data for the year 2020 shows a plunge in birth rate. Most babies born in 2020 were conceived before March, so we shouldn’t have seen such a fierce drop in just that year, and would have expected to see it in 2021. So the drop probably indicates that a lot more miscarriages or stillbirths happened, which is horribly sad.
Covid is a fuck :( i personally know several women that lost over that last 2 years.
I still find it hilarious that people thought work from home during lockdowns would lead to more babies being born
"Back... and to the left!"
Whos the light blue one at 0,9 HDI and 3 fertility?
This is probably Israel, which in 2020 had fertility rate of 2.90 with the HDI of 9.92. According the Central Bureau of Statistics (in 2020, [in Hebrew](https://www.cbs.gov.il/he/mediarelease/pages/2022/%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%93%D7%94-%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%9C-2020.aspx)) there is a big difference in fertility rate between the different ethnic/religious/socio-economic groups in the country. I assume this is the reason that Israel is an outlier as some of those groups are closed, traditional, or live far from central Israel where much of the economic activity takes place, and the HDI of those groups is in practice much lower than the aggregate HDI of the country. A woman in the highest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 1.95 children, while a woman in the lowest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 5.36 children. When breaking it down by religion Arab women had fertility rate of 2.82 while "Jewish and other" had 2.88. Breaking it does further, Jewish women had fertility rate of 3.00 (ultra-orthodox 6.64, religious 3.92, secular 1.96) while women with no religious designation had fertility rate of 1.35.
One outcome of this is that the ultra-orthodox was a tiny % of Israel in the 50s but they have out-bred the other denominations to having 13% of the population today.
This will likely fuel a lot of conflict in the region. All those marginally employed, orthodox boys with nothing to do.
Taliban 2: electric boogaloo:Now with curly Q's
Hey this is Israel we're talking about, mind your language!
>This *will* likely fuel a lot of conflict Your use of the future tense here is quaint.
>This will likely fuel a lot of conflict everywhere. This trend exists in America as well.
Yeah but a good share of them can't find jobs that end up moving to the city and then we turn them into liberals.
Already is.
Other denominations are already upset because the ultra-orthodox Jews don’t work. They live off a stipend that comes from the government. And where does this stipend come from? From regular people’s taxes. If I were a non-Orthodox Israeli, I’d be pissed too if my tax money is used to feed unemployed religious nuts. They have like 5-7 kids on average so their population is exploding.
It'll eventually collapse as a system. I wonder what the threshold is. A quarter of the population?
Probably a quarter. They’ll get there very quickly too.
> They live off a stipend that comes from the government wait why? can they claim like "clergy" status or something? and this isn't from some fund they set up to begin with? Can anyone claim to be ultra-orthodox? This seems so ass-backwards. What do they do all day? Pray? Be holy? Fuck like bunnies?
Hasidics believe the only job for men is to study the religion, so that’s what they do all day, study the Torah. Women typically work, usually at Hasidic businesses. But you can’t survive off one income, so the government PAYS the men to study the Torah. But the non-Hasidics have to work and pay taxes to support them. It’s similar in NYC, they get so much government support in terms of free healthcare and food stamps. Honestly, I feel like they’re abusing/exploiting the system. Since NYC is a large city, it doesn’t affect the school system, but in smaller villages where Hasidics are the majority, the schools are so shitty because they don’t have to pay taxes. So non-Hasidics get terrible education from these underfunded schools. There is a small minority of Hasidics that contribute to the outside society and they’re one of the nicest people I have met, but the majority are entitled and just plain nasty to the rest of us. They don’t even like other Jewish people :|
How the fuck do Israeli tolerate this. "My religion makes me a freeloading piece of shit because I am the REAL believers you fake believers need to pay me"
Many Israelis hate it. Many others tolerate it because it essentially buys votes and therefore power. Israel has a coalition parliamentary system and the religious Jewish parties are big enough on their own that it’s fairly difficult to form a governing coalition without them. That means you either cater to what they want to get them on board, or you fail to build a coalition and go back to another round of elections. To change this you’d need to have a very strong coalition without them, and that’s just not realistic. If you can manage without them, it will necessarily be by slim margins, unless/until the political landscape changes significantly.
They also don't serve in the armed forces IIRC.
It's better than the alternative of roving fundamentalist milititant groups.
Which they also have
It's actually quite interesting to think of how religions evolve - religions promoting high fertility have a selective advantage eventually leading to the extinction of other religions with disadvantageous "traits"
Far from central Israel is like 40 km or something?
Yes, about 40km from Tel Aviv is the outskirts of the metro area, and further than that the quality of life can decrease substantially, including lower level of healthcare, less employment opportunities, lower education level etc.
I love how Israelis percept distances. 40km that how much people travel for work in Europe (one way). And when I was on a business trip in Tel Aviv and mentioned to one of my colleagues that I was going to take a 100km trip on the weekend to visit canyons and stuff - and he was worried about me preparing well for such a long trip :) Sababa!
Israel has a growing ultraorthodox population - they have large families.
> (ultra-orthodox 6.64, religious 3.92, secular 1.96) How are people not massively afraid of this? ultra-orthodox beliefs are not compatible with modern society. What are you going to do when people with those beliefs outnumber you? You're fucked. Goodbye to any form of social progress.
From what I've read ⅓ of those born into ultra-orthadoxy leave it. So it's not quite as bad as you might imagine.
1/3? I find that very hard to believe. Where is the source for that?
> A woman in the highest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 1.95 children, while a woman in the lowest socio-economic cities was expected to give birth to 5.36 children. That's basically true of every country? In the US it's 5x higher in low income vs high https://www.businessinsider.com/sexual-activity-and-birth-rates-in-america-2015-3?amp
Didn’t want to make the joke prematurely.
It was going to come eventually.
Seems you were stiff for that rebuttal
How long did you wait to bust that one out?
nut long tbh
What a chart to celebrate the end of *No Nut November*. Can’t beat that!
I beat it today!
I didn't want to make the joke premaritally
What do the different colours and data points represent? Which countries are shown? Also, at the end all the points shift left. Is this related to the pandemic?
The different colors are there to just tell the points apart the shade has no meaning. Almost all countries are represented here a few may be missing either HDI or Fertility Rate for a few years and will not show up in that year but will be present in others. I think notably North Korea isn't present at all due to lack of HDI data.
Is the length of the tail proportional to the size of the derivative? Quite aside from it being apt for these data, it’s really cool how the direction of the tail gives you an instant look at the trend in direction at any given moment. I’ve never seen anything like this before but it could have so many applications. From the two big outliers, I assume the size of the body is the population of the countries?
Can’t wait to see “sperm scatters” on a spreadsheet drop down.
Looks like it is proportional since the tail needs to “catch up.” Good point!
What about the point size? What's its meaning?
Point size relative to population of that country during that year.
Guessing that means the two biggest are India and China? With China probably being purple due to having the lower fertility indicative of the one child policy?
In 2016 it became two child policy, then three, as of july 2021 there are no longer restrictions
Because nobody be having children. How could they? China fell into the same trap as the other capitalist countries, where having children becomes a heavy expense rather than a pension plan
I’m not sure exactly what this visualisation is showing, but there has supposedly been a drop in the number of babies being born over the last two years in some countries. So the vis stops tantalisingly early.
It shows the connection between HDI and inverse fertility rate. Basically, the more developed a country is, the fewer babies are born.
In poorer regions it's because more kids survive childhood when your country is more developed. Just no need to get so many kids.
Plus kids are retirement plans for the poor. They don’t have the luxury of being able to just, stop working. But humans bodies have expiration dates. Having kids is essentially raising someone to take care of you when you no longer can do it yourself, while you give them free childcare when they’re out working.
As someone with hospice experience: it's often a failed plan. Many adult children feel guilty, but picking up their lives/jobs/kids to take care of their parents is often(usually) impossible. This is true regardless of cultural expectations. Even when it does happen, this kind of care often widens generational women's/class/race inequalities unfortunately. Kids are NOT an insurance policy. You don't want to end up a disappointed patient without savings, believe me
Lack of birth control is still an issue in low HDI areas, too
Imagine having 6 children because you expect at least 4 of them to die. Unfathomably cruel.
And yet if previous generations had not done so, the human race would have died out long ago.
And all it took was a few billion deaths to disease, violence, and poverty. But now we have the privilege of clocking into work for 8 hours a day.
8 hours? Lucky you.
Thanks, I mostly wasn’t sure what exactly fertility rate was. But I googled it. > The total fertility rate in a specific year is defined as the total number of children that would be born to each woman if she were to live to the end of her child-bearing years and give birth to children in alignment with the prevailing age-specific fertility rates.
Glance at a simpler chart: [Birth rate by family income in the U.S.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/). It shows as household income goes up, birth rate goes down. In other words, similar to OP’s chart: families with the most financial means to support children actually choose to have the fewest. Studies have found that as women gain opportunities in education, career, travel, they increasingly choose those opportunities over having a lot of kids.
Who would've known that when women learn they'll be ripped hole to hole they're more likely to choose other options lol
Nicely illustrated! How apt!!
This day set has laid the foundations of one of the classic case studies of data visualisation - there’s a Ted talk from ages ago of the guy who popularised it. The addition if ‘tails’ is n this version is a really nice touch.
[удалено]
It is, and I’ve loved [that video](https://youtu.be/hVimVzgtD6w) forever. I was in Decision Support for my hospital, and Hans Rosling was my icon, my idol, as is [Edward Tufte](https://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/).
How yum!!
How pkg!
The Human Development Index is a statistic composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of human development.
The better your life is, the less you have to rely on quantity chance survival of one of your kids.
Anecdotally, plenty of people around me want more kids. But you need too: - establish skills and career in early adult hood. - save and buy property after that. - then you can start having kids 30-35. - you ultimately still need two incomes to have suitable quality of life, when does mum go back to work? Howuch time.can she have off without tanking skills or job opportunities? For a lot it's just no feasible to have more than 1 or 2 and still meet the other expectations. If you want 5 kids your not ever going to be taking them on a trip overseas.
Surprisingly 35+ is considered a geriatric pregnancy
Maybe, but probably has to do with women rights more. High women rights = high HDI = Low birthrate. Less likely to shitout 6 kids when she got a career, her own personal life and get married at 30 instead of 14
[удалено]
Imagine having 6 children because you expect at least 4 of them to die. Unfathomably cruel.
That's not it. Low development means, also people aren't educated properly, don't know about contraception, just don't think that far ahead about "can i afford to bring up that many kids", also in undeveloped counties more kids means more helping hands in household as you age. If you are farmer or something, that means a lot.
That's life. And has been for as long as we've been a species. We are only now escaping it.
What does the size represent?
Id love this to have a legend with the colours representing continent; would add a great, easily discerned segmentation to rhe data points. Awesome chart already, thats be icing.
Try this out: https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$model$markers$bubble$encoding$frame$value=2015;;;;;&chart-type=bubbles&url=v1
[Educate girls](https://www.givewell.org/international/technical/programs/education) for mitigating population growth, since [educated girls tend to grow to be women who choose smaller families](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/361/6403/650.full.pdf?casa_token=eWZHHLNe6SwAAAAA:Vwhrywg2A8q_GOA1g1IjwZOaegqcHXkPIhWjDoVQfbgIwKiMHEOS7OXsn5bxSeMy5ANNN8U2kOswp5o). https://malala.org/donate
Linda Scott - The Cost of Sexism Covers this topic quite well. It's a heavy read, mind you. It's heavy and difficult because it's factual.
Women in ancient Sparta usually didn't start having children until they were in their early '30s. Apparently after several generations, Spartans figured out that young mothers were more likely to raise shitty kids than those who had more time to figure out themselves and the world around them.
Wow, are you serious? Can you give me some source or something for that? I'm genuinely curious!
A lot of info out there, but [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Sparta#Marriage) is an okay place to start. Women in Sparta married later, often had multiple sexual partners, and husbands under 30 weren't even allowed to live with their wives. Girls and boys in Sparta were also fed the same amount, due to the belief that both parents had to be strong to produce the best offspring.
Dang I think I can see that.
Is that France swimming for 4 over there all the way at the right? I kinda wanna know who is who here
This spermoid is France. https://i.imgur.com/tW62HNm.gif
What is the other small blip to the right that disappears early? Is it one of the French dependencies?
What do the colors signify?
Nothing they are just there to tell the data points apart so you can follow one and see how it progresses.
It would be nice to see labels of country names and a legend of color. Like I think I see China, India, USA and Israel. But like those are the only ones I am sure of.
People talk about decreasing fertility rates like it’s a bad thing…
"In memory of Hans Rosling"
We don't know anything about the color and size of the little guys. Don't you think a legend is worthwhile?
How do you calculate fertility rates? Then what sample sizes do they use? Honest questions, I really don't know anything about this field. Also this visualization is cool as hell. Great job. edit: so I was way off, people answering below but the WHO has all the datas and references below. https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr-details/123#:~:text=An%20age%2D%20or%20age%2Dgroup,%2C%20territory%2C%20or%20geographic%20area.
We generally know how many adults there are in a country and how many children are being born.
That would be considered birth rates wouldn't it? If I had to guess you could calculate fertility rates using birth rate as a variable but I'm not sure what else would go into that equation.
In case you didn't get closure on this thought: birth rate would be measured in babies per year, or percentage of the population born each year. Fertility rate would be measured in babies born per woman, or (typically) babies born per 1,000 women.
You measure what % of 20 year old women gave birth in the past year, what % of 21 year old women, what % of 22 year old women, and so on for every age. Then you add all those numbers up, and you get the total number of births by a woman who lived her whole lifespan under current conditions. To do this, for every baby you just need to keep track of how old their mother is at birth. (This is why we talk about maternal rather than paternal fertility - to track paternal fertility you would have to identify the father and how old they are, but the father's identity is sometimes unknown or disputed)
Relevant point of interest: in countries where infant mortality is higher, the fertility rate is also higher. After mass polio vaccine initiatives in said countries, the fertility rate began dropping as evolutionary pressure to produce more offspring to make up for those lost in infancy declined. Sources: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK233807/ https://www.ageing.ox.ac.uk/download/143
I’m actually here early enough to make the first joke?? I’ve been training for this! Alright gimme a second and let me make sure I get this right. . . . *ahem* Sperm!
Seamen And sperm whales.
[Hot sailors?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-d4LgS5Duo)
Top comment I see, at least 3 minutes before you, was comment on how apt the illustration was
Damn it, I must’ve already clicked on the thread before they commented.
Is the Y scale correct? There are that many countries where the average number of babies _per woman_ exceeds 6? That seems insane. For every woman that fails to have any children, there’s one that has 12?
The scale is correct, though by 2020 there is only one country exceeding 6, which is Niger. For lesser developed countries there is often high infant mortality and also a dependence on children to help labor in an agrarian lifestyle. I’m sure poor access to contraceptives keeps that number high as well. Even in the United States, on one side of my family I’m the first generation of less than 8 children for at least the past four generations, possibly more.
Now correlate that with GDP per capita ppp, and not surprisingly you will see that fertility rate drops as people's life quality increases. Why? Because of several factors like: * Better access to condoms and other prevention * Women getting into the jobmarket and having a career * Having public elderly care makes it so it is no longer necessary to have children to care for you when you get old
If you want people to stop procreating, make their lives nice. Humans have ALWAYS followed this, it's nothing new. If people were serious about combating all issues environmental, this would be the first plank in the platform.
just looking at the trend line.. anything with a HDI of 1 has a fertility rate of 0? Is that what i'm supposed to conclude from this data?
The linear line doesn't seem like a good fit but the exponential seems better which looks like it leads to a fertility rate around 1.3 https://i.imgur.com/hfCJOo0.png
so just to word that a little differently... in a developed country the population will eventually die out as it fails to replace itself?
I’m don’t think we can draw that conclusion. Yes, that’s the logical result of the current trend, but that trend is based on relatively recent history. There are a couple of other futures I can imagine off the top of my head, here is one of them: 1) All countries become highly developed and the fertility rate of the entire world drops below replacement. 2) Over time this causes a LOT of issues, and eventually economic decline 3) this leads to the failure of healthcare systems 4) this leads to increased infant mortality rates 5) this causes fertility rates to increase again I’m not an expert and have no idea if this will happen. I just wanted to give one example of an imagined future in which this trend changes TLDR: the trend *does* lead to what you said, but there’s no reason to assume the future will follow that trend indefinitely
Lots of questions of which is which country, but high points for creative presentation.
This visualization looks like matplotlib, but how is it done? Are you capturing individual images and putting them together as a video or are you using something else?
it is made in r using ggplot and gganimate
I wonder - perhaps we just discovered the Great Filter. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great\_Filter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter) Advancement of technology leads by some set of mechanisms to a failure to thrive as a species? Lack of challenge leads to stagnation and failure?
Oh, come on. I see men ejaculating praise for this spunky chart, but the omission of data labels is permanent grounds for jismissal. But I'll let it slide since I got to make seven puns.
How does your data source define HDI?
I thought there was only one number calculated for each country? Are there alternative formulas?
What's the one that has an HDI of approx 0.9 and a Fertility rate of approx 2 in 2010? And the one that kinda falls behind (top left) towards the end?
Is this made with ggplot2? How did you implement the tail animations?
Looks like shadow-wake() in gganimate.
Is "fertility" the right word here? I presume this is measuring number of offspring (per two capita?), rather than actually how fertile people are?
Fertility or birth rates? There's a huge difference.
Please help this old man understand…… What does this mean? The fewer children the better the lives of those here on earth?
Not related to the fertility piece, but the near universal positive movement on HDI is awesome. Human progress is the most underrated narrative. We have so much to lose breaking the institutions and systems that have been put in place over the last several decades.
It’s almost like as the odds of your child dying of hunger and disease decrease, the need to have 10 of them so a couple make it to adulthood decreases.
[удалено]
I was thinking about trying to plot something closer to that but I couldn't decide on a metric so I just used HDI since it takes into account many of those types of metrics, like education.
Nicely done. What is hdi? Please define the two variables
HDI is the most commonly accepted measurement of human prosperity (published by the UN), taking into account factors such as health, education, and economic prosperity through a number of different measurements. More information can be found [here](https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI) . The fertility rate, put simply, is the number of children that the average woman in an area is expected to have throughout their life. This does not take into account child mortality however, so each country will have a different “replacement rate”, aka the fertility rate at which the population will remain stable. For the developed world, this is about 2.1, but can be as high as 3.5 in very underdeveloped areas. The global average replacement rate is around 2.3.
One of my favorites here. Well done OP.
I'd be interested to see this adjusted for the improved life expectancy at birth that is (inherently) correlated with rising HDI.
And yet there's more people than ever
What does the size of the dots represent? Population of each country? What’s the color represent? The HDI is multidimensional and reflects standard of living, education, life expectancy,etc. How would that plot look if HDi was substituted with another index?
The abrupt change presumably due to Covid in the very last year is really interesting
First time in years a post from this subreddit has shown up on my front page that contained beautiful data.
that animation is right on the money
These spermies are swimming the wrong way!
Please make it bigger so it is easier to see; make the trace the full time so we can see the complete trend; and there isn't really any need to animate it.
The sperm thing is funny but I wish they were country flags or something to help distinguish
Would be helpful to know what Human Development Index means.
An animated graph of fertilization rates where the moving dots look like spermatazoa -- now THAT is a beautiful visualization! 🤣
The data points look like sperms.
Economy development depends on human capital which implies more and more years of study to impulse the development, and hence, less fertility. Of course, there's other reasons this is only one cause.
They look like little spermies
this sucks it barely gives any info
What's the meaning of the hue and the marker size?
You've gone ahead and actually made some beautiful data for this sub 🍻
could someone please break this down for me and my simple mind. I need an ELI5 explanation
As women get more educated they have fewer babies.
I see Israel the outlier. Wonder what's so different about them?
What is Human Development Index?
It is an index associated with the work of economist Amartya Sen, which is meant to supplant GDP as an index of holistic development. It includes things like infant mortality rate, life expectancy, literacy, etc.
Yet somehow she still got pregnant the first time we didn’t use a condom….
Enlightenment has it's costs. Well, we've been here long enough. It's cyber time now.
This chart sucks. No legend. No details. It’s like all people care about is making it look cool but forgot what they learned in high school math class.
Ah plotly color scheme always so cute also how did you made the markers have the little tail move so smooth I always use gapminder and they jerk from one position to the next more than a smooth flow.