I do some quick desperate calculations in my head. That can’t be right, can it? “For 35 to 44-year-olds, it’s more likely to be twice a week,” the article continues. Well, I’m 33. Which is nearly 35. But still . . . twice a week? Don’t any of these people have kids? Or jobs?

At work I search for a more encouraging statistic. The Durex website comes to the rescue. We, the British, have sex 55 times a year, it says. Even a GCSE mathematician will tell you that’s a snip over once a week.

This must mean that if the 25-44 age group are averaging thrice-weekly how’s-your-father, everyone else must be almost hanky-panky free. But wasn’t there a report out recently that said the over 55s were at it like rabbits? Someone, I conclude, must be lying – and my money’s on the 25 to 34-year-olds.

As of April Fool’s Day, all labour government statistics require a kitemark to show they’ve been approved by the new UK Statistics Authority.

Anything that stops politicians making things up is a good thing, but it still won’t rid society of all the non governmental statistics that hang around making all our lives a misery.

It’s not just sex. Men who eat four meals a day are half as likely to be obese as men who eat three meals a day (Men’s Health); women who give birth in their forties are four times more likely to live to 100 (Grazia); eating sausages daily increases your risk of cancer by 20% (Daily Alarmist, sorry Mail); and my own favourite, women spend as much on make-up as they do on household cleaning products. Honestly, ladies.

At lunch, apropos of nothing, a female colleague storms over and says she was right: she is a better driver than me. “What’s your evidence?” I demand huffily. She tells me about a new survey which shows that men are three times more likely to be convicted of a driving offence than women. “Big wow,” I reply, “but statistically speaking I have hit 100% fewer lampposts than you. Which means I am 100% better.” You see how we need all our statistics kite-marked?

Sex is off which is bad, given the statistics. My mood thickens further when I remember that only one in nine readers gets to the end of the average article. This is below average so what’s the point in finding child-abduction panic button installed at the end of every street so we’re all just that bit more paranoid and overprotective of our kids.

From:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/incomingFeeds/article3735971.ece

Health Direct reveals a small flaw in labour’s plans to restore trust in labour’s use of statistics. The new statistics website’s name- www.statistics.gov.uk