---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: openspace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 26, 2005 8:08 PM
Subject: [invitesplus] The Search for 100 Million Missing Women
To: iplus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

http://slate.msn.com/id/2119402/

The Search for 100 Million Missing Women
An economics detective story.
By Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt

What is economics, anyway? It's not so much a subject matter
as a sort of tool kit-one that, when set loose on a thicket
of information, can determine the effect of any given
factor. "The economy" is the thicket that concerns jobs and
real estate and banking and investment. But the economist's
tool kit can just as easily be put to more creative use.

Consider, for instance, an incendiary argument made by the
economist Amartya Sen in 1990. In an essay in the New York
Review of Books, Sen claimed that there were some 100
million "missing women" in Asia. While the ratio of men to
women in the West was nearly even, in countries like China,
India, and Pakistan, there were far more men than women. Sen
charged these cultures with gravely mistreating their young
girls-perhaps by starving their daughters at the expense of
their sons or not taking the girls to doctors when they
should have. Although Sen didn't say so, there were other
sinister possibilities. Were the missing women a result of
selective abortions? Female infanticide? A forced export of
prostitutes?

Sen had used the measurement tools of economics to uncover a
jarring mystery and to accuse a culprit-misogyny. But now
another economist has reached a startlingly different
conclusion. Emily Oster is an economics graduate student at
Harvard who started running regression analyses when she was
10 (both her parents are economists) and is particularly
interested in studying disease. She first learned of the
"missing women" theory while she was an undergraduate. Then
one day last summer, while doing some poolside reading in
Las Vegas-the book was Baruch Blumberg's Hepatitis B: The
Hunt for a Killer Virus-she discovered a strange fact. In a
series of small-scale medical studies in Greece, Greenland,
and elsewhere, researchers had found that a pregnant woman
with hepatitis B is far more likely to have a baby boy than
a baby girl. It wasn't clear why-it may be that a female
fetus is more likely to be miscarried when exposed to the
virus.


Oster was suitably intrigued. She set out first to see if
she could use data to confirm Blumberg's thesis. A vaccine
for hepatitis B, she learned, had been available since the
late 1970s. She found good data on a U.S. government
vaccination program in Alaska. Before the vaccinations
began, Alaskan natives had a historically high incidence of
hepatitis B as well as a high birth ratio of boys to girls.
White Alaskans, meanwhile, had a low incidence of hepatitis
B and gave birth to the standard ratio of boys to girls. But
after a universal vaccination program was carried out in
Alaska, the Native Alaskans' boy-girl ratio fell almost
immediately to the normal range, while the white Alaskans'
ratio was unchanged. A vaccination program in Taiwan
revealed similar results.

Convinced now of the relationship between hepatitis B and
birth gender, Oster set out on a vast data mission to
determine the magnitude of that relationship. She measured
the incidence of hepatitis B in the populations of China,
India, Pakistan, Egypt, Bangladesh, and other countries
where mothers gave birth to an unnaturally high number of
boys. Sure enough, the regions with the most hepatitis B
were the regions with the most "missing" women. Except the
women weren't really missing at all, for they had never been
born.

If you believe Oster's numbers-and as they are presented in
a soon-to-be-published paper, they are extremely
compelling-then her detective work has established the fate
of roughly 50 million of Amartya Sen's missing women. Her
discovery hardly means that Sen was wrong to cry misogyny,
at least in some parts of the world: While Oster found, for
instance, that Hepatitis B can account for roughly 75
percent of the missing women in China, it can account for
less than 20 percent of the boy-girl gap in Sen's native
India. The culprits behind the disappearance of the 50
million women whom Oster did not find are likely the
horrible ones that Sen and others have suggested. But
Oster's analysis does show that economics is particularly
useful for challenging a received wisdom-in this case, one
that was originally put forth by another economist.

The key to Oster's research was the availability of large
and reliable sets of data. This is an advantage in economics
that is not always conferred on the other social sciences.
Consider now a different piece of groundbreaking research in
developmental psychology.

In the early 1980s, a group of psychologists and linguists
banded together to write Narratives From the Crib, a study
of how children acquire linguistic skills. Narratives was
built around the speech patterns of one child, a 2-year-old
girl. Her parents had noticed that she often talked to
herself in the crib after they said good night and left her
room. They were curious to know what she was saying, so they
began to record her chatter. They turned on the tape
recorder while they were tucking her in and then left it
running. Eventually they gave the tapes to a psychologist
friend, who shared it with her colleagues. The big surprise
to these experts was that the girl's speech was far more
sophisticated when she was alone than when she was speaking
with her parents. This finding, as Malcolm Gladwell would
later write in The Tipping Point, "was critical in changing
the views of many child experts."

The 2-year-old girl in question was referred to as Baby
Emily. Her full name? Emily Oster. In retrospect, it would
appear that Narratives From the Crib suffers what
researchers call an "n of 1" problem, with "n" representing
the size of the sample set-a problem that is gravely
exacerbated when the one subject turns out to be . well, a
good bit brighter than average. Studying how children learn
to talk by observing Baby Emily may be a bit like studying
how children learn to play golf by studying Tiger Woods. Now
that she's an economist, Emily Oster has at least assured
herself that she will never contribute to another "n of 1"
problem. The challenge in her field-and so far she has met
it well-is quite the opposite: to take a mass of disparate
numbers and somehow wring from it one thing that is true.


Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner are the authors of
Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of
Everything.

Illustration by Robert Neubecker

_____________________
anita and edwin
be the black sheep of the family. then you have respectable
relatives, they don't. nothing will infuriate them more!

Reply via email to