I didn't even bother looking at the loooooong posts.

Statistics is such that you have to be very careful when
analyzing and interpreting them. Basically, to give a short
example,
10 pregnant women give birth. 8 healthy babies are born, 3
babies didn't survive.
Is the healthcare system to be blamed for the 3 deaths?
Depends on the situation!
1 baby died because her mom is a drug and alcoholic
abuser. Hospital's fault? No.
1 baby died because it was
stillborn. Hospital's fault? Maybe. Need
more info.
1 baby died because of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome)
within its first week of life. Hospital's fault?
Depends on whether baby had already been discharged or still under
the hospital's care.
But you don't see the scenarios! What's reported is only
"30% infant mortality rate" in this sample group.
This is a very simple example of how you cannot just take
statistics at face value without doing a more intense study on the
sample group, the norms, and all the other statistical and
empirical data typically required.
ha ha.The whole oz is the sample group.I am not taking sample
!!
damn it,only 2004 figure for 2007 year book!
By 2004 this had declined to 5
infant deaths per 1,000 live births.
Infant
deaths per 1,000 live births.

2002-04

total: 4.82 deaths/1,000 live births --oz
male: 5.15 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 4.47 deaths/1,000 live births (2008 est.)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
1.we are talking live births,not still born.
2.If drugs addicts can affect the rate of oz ,
a country of 21 million,then how many drug addicts in Oz.
It is a very gd PSLE maths question,if we add on few more
figures.