Vending Machine More Hazardous Than Sharks

Question

This claim has been proven to be true. This website starts off with the quote, "the oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is the unknown" by H.P. Lovecraft. Diving into the meaning of this, sharks are not as dangerous as people may think, we are just scared of the unknown. According to the website, the number of fatalities from sharks worldwide is between 4-6 a year, not what you would expect. This correlates to a 1 in 250 million chance of dying from a shark. On the other hand, with evidence, the chances of getting killed from a vending machine is 1 in 112 million. Many other sources including World Wildlife Fund, Georgia Aquarium and the National Science Foundation, also state the truth about sharks and how they are stereotyped. Even though the article doesn't go into much detail about the vending machine situation other than the proven statistic, it also shows a chart of how many different insignificant things are more likely to kill you than a shark attack. these include fireworks, drowning, and excessive cold. Overall, this statement is true and can be proven correct by many primary and secondary sources.

Answer 1

The claim that vending machines are more dangerous than sharks is true. According to the article "Vending Machines are more Dangerous than Sharks, it states, "The yearly risk in the U.S. of dying from a shark bite is roughly 1 in 250 million. In contrast, the yearly risk of dying from a vending machine accident is roughly 1 in 112 million" (Heal the Bay). The data clearly proves that the odds of dying from a vending machine are actually higher than dying from a shark bite. I found this claim to be very interesting and was surprised that it was true. 
 

Answer 2

The claim that vending machines are more hazardous than sharks, while exaggerated, is true. This claim is supported by data from Heal the Bay which states that there is about a 1 in 250 million chance of death by shark attack compared to the much smaller 1 in 112 million chance of death by a vending machine. That being said, this claim should be taken with a grain of salt as though people more commonly come into contact with vending machines than they do sharks. This is an important statistic that is majorly overlooked in this post and that's why it's more of an exaggerated truth than a just truth. Slate further elaborates on this by saying how shark attacks gets more attention from the news and is often broadcasted heavily while accidents including vending machines get little to none. This statement pushes the narrative that sharks are more dangerous making the original claim seem even more wild and unlikely. 

Answer 3

Rationale & Reflection:

 

This claim is accurate when comparing fatality statistics, not overall risk or exposure. Data cited from credible organizations such as the National Safety Council and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that shark fatalities are extremely rare in the United States, while vending machine related deaths, though still uncommon, occur more frequently. Shark fatality data from the International Shark Attack File supports this comparison. The claim relies on counterintuitive framing to challenge public fear, which is heavily shaped by media portrayals rather than actual risk. This example demonstrates how emotional imagery and availability bias can distort perceptions of danger, reinforcing the importance of media literacy and statistical context when evaluating claims.Think of this as your investigation log. 
 

Answer 4

1. Brief overall summary of  findings

The claim that vending machines are more hazardous than sharks is supported by statistical evidence comparing fatalities. Shark attacks resulting in death are extremely rare, while vending machine accidents, although still uncommon, occur more frequently. The claim is accurate when framed as a comparison of fatality statistics rather than everyday risk.

2. Primary sources

National Safety Council (NSC)
The National Safety Council provides data on accidental deaths in the United States, including vending machine–related fatalities. This data shows that vending machine accidents cause occasional deaths each year, usually from machines tipping over.
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/

International Shark Attack File (Florida Museum of Natural History)
This database tracks confirmed shark attacks and fatalities worldwide. It shows that fatal shark attacks are very rare, often averaging fewer than ten deaths globally per year.
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/shark-attacks/

3. Secondary sources

Heal the Bay article
This article summarizes data from reputable organizations to challenge common fears about sharks. It uses statistics to argue that sharks are far less dangerous than popular media portrayals suggest.
https://healthebay.org/

4. Potential biases or interests

Heal the Bay is an environmental organization focused on marine conservation, so it has an interest in improving public perception of sharks. However, the statistics cited come from independent and credible sources, which reduces the likelihood that the data itself is biased.

5. Evidence that supports the claim

Statistical evidence from the National Safety Council shows that vending machine accidents cause more deaths than shark attacks. Data from the International Shark Attack File confirms that shark fatalities are extremely rare, supporting the comparison made in the claim.

6. Evidence that undermines the claim

The claim can be misleading without context because people interact with vending machines far more often than sharks. While the statistics are accurate, the comparison does not account for differences in exposure or frequency of interaction.

Answer 5

1. Brief overall summary of your findings

The claim that vending machines are more hazardous than sharks is supported by statistical evidence comparing fatalities. Shark attacks resulting in death are extremely rare, while vending machine accidents, although still uncommon, occur more frequently. The claim is accurate when framed as a comparison of fatality statistics rather than everyday risk.

2. Primary sources

National Safety Council (NSC)
The National Safety Council provides data on accidental deaths in the United States, including vending machine–related fatalities. This data shows that vending machine accidents cause occasional deaths each year, usually from machines tipping over.
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/

International Shark Attack File (Florida Museum of Natural History)
This database tracks confirmed shark attacks and fatalities worldwide. It shows that fatal shark attacks are very rare, often averaging fewer than ten deaths globally per year.
https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/shark-attacks/

3. Secondary sources

Heal the Bay article
This article summarizes data from reputable organizations to challenge common fears about sharks. It uses statistics to argue that sharks are far less dangerous than popular media portrayals suggest.
https://healthebay.org/

4. Potential biases or interests

Heal the Bay is an environmental organization focused on marine conservation, so it has an interest in improving public perception of sharks. However, the statistics cited come from independent and credible sources, which reduces the likelihood that the data itself is biased.

5. Evidence that supports the claim

Statistical evidence from the National Safety Council shows that vending machine accidents cause more deaths than shark attacks. Data from the International Shark Attack File confirms that shark fatalities are extremely rare, supporting the comparison made in the claim.

6. Evidence that undermines the claim

The claim can be misleading without context because people interact with vending machines far more often than sharks. While the statistics are accurate, the comparison does not account for differences in exposure or frequency of interaction.

Answer 6

I found this claim very interesting so I decided to read the article that they provided. After doing so, I found that this evidence is credible and therefore true! Once reading the article I learned that shark attacks worldwide and yearly are quiet rare. Shark bites average to be 1 in 250 million while for vending machines they are 1 in 112 million. Therefore showing that the statistical average is higher for vending machines than for sharks. I also believe that you can argue that sharks "attack" humans due to believing they are fish and not people, while vending machines fatalities are caused by human actions.  

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190808-why-do-sharks-attack-humans

Answer 7

This claim is a generally true one, however, the use of the word hazardous is misleading. The source used in one that has a bias toward sharks as it is a marine conservation organization, and though their death rate claims do present to be true such as seen in this article; the leading reason for death via vending machine in terms of cause is "When a machine "steals" their money or fails to deliver their purchase, customers feel they have no recourse but to take matters into their own hands"(https://zippyassist.com/articles/death-by-vending-machine). They also refer earlier in the article to many of the reported shark attacks (not deaths) as "unprovoked". Vending Machines may boast a larger death toll annually, however, the leading cause is due to human action brought about by frustration while a large portion of reported annual shark attacks are considered "unprovoked". There are provoked shark attacks or cases in which the person should obviously not have gone to swim in shark infested waters, however, to consider vending machines as a larger hazard than a carnivorous animal of which among many species are much larger than a human promotes a false sense of safety around these powerful creatures regardless of their media depiction being more aggressive than in actuality.