U.S. Regions with Stricter Gun Laws Have Lower Rates of Pediatric Injuries Due to Firearms

[sarisataka]

U.S. Regions with Stricter Gun Laws Have Lower Rates of Pediatric Injuries Due to Firearms

New research shows regions of the United States that have the strictest gun laws also have the lowest rates of childhood firearm injuries, with the Northeast region of the U.S. having the lowest rates of child injuries due to guns.

The study abstract, “Geographic Regions with Stricter Gun Laws Have Fewer Emergency Department Visits for Pediatric Firearm-Related Injuries: A Five-Year National Study,” will be presented Friday, Sept. 15, at the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference & Exhibition in Chicago.

For the study, researchers compared regional firearms laws to the number of firearms-related injuries in regional emergency departments. Using national data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample from 2009-2013, researchers analyzed 111,839 emergency department visits for pediatric firearm-related injuries across the U.S., broken down by state and region.

“Our research confirms that regions that have stricter gun laws have a significantly lower rate of firearm injuries among children,” said Monika Goyal, MD, MSCE, an assistant professor of pediatrics and emergency medicine at Children’s National Health System and The George Washington University.

http://www.aappublications.org/news/2017/09/15/NCEGunLaw091517



A potentially useful study has blemishes that illustrate why there is so much resistance to these studies. Obvious issues with the study create a perception that, rather than an unbiased study reaching a derived conclusion, it is a preconceived conclusion that has a study created to support the conclusion:

-the study repeatedly uses the term 'children' but later acknowledges over 50% of the ER visits are by ages 18 or older. This skews the results by including a group of adults (actually the majority) that is very different from the emphasized demographic, children

-while the data is available on a by state basis, it seems they only analyze it regionally. This gives the impression that there may be states which would not support the conclusion and therefore are grouped to hide inconvenient data

-while using Brady ranking may seem to allow a consistent comparison of state laws, the ranking in actually a subjective, arbitrary, non-reviewed grading done by an organization which openly has an extremely biased agenda

-they acknowledge the average rate of ER visits remained constant over the study period. They do not appear to try to explain why firearm law changes during that period did not show any change in the rate of ER visits


Until studies can be done without such questions of bias, there will be resistance to useful, life-saving research on the subject. It is unfortunate the Obama administration study PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH TO REDUCE THE THREAT OF FIREARM-RELATED VIOLENCE languishes without action. No independent group has chosen to pursue any of the suggested research; perhaps due to the CDC finding that gun related violence is a complex issue and the traditional mantras (more guns/more gun control) are overly simplistic and ultimately ineffective.

[yagotme]

1. It would be nice,

if those individuals/groups would do actual, fact based studies, instead of pushing a political slant. THAT would be refreshing. Theorize all you want, study all you want, just PLEASE publish the unvarnished truth (or not, if it doesn't go your way). Lying about a study, with the overwhelming capability of others to easily duplicate your research without bias, is an utterly stupid thing to do. You could get away with it for a long time 50 years ago, but today, it is difficult to hide/misrepresent facts for any length of time.

[Straw Man]

2. A pre-selected sample.

Regions with stricter gun laws have a lower percentage of gun owners. That's how those laws get passed in the first place.