The Economist does not understand numbers
Posted by Pete McBreen 20 Jan 2013 at 11:26
From Difference Engine: Edison’s revenge
It is true, and was the basis of Edison’s showmanship, that low-frequency alternating current can be more hazardous than an equivalent direct current. By oscillating at a similar (ie, close enough) frequency to the human heart, a sufficiently strong alternating current can cause that organ to beat arhythmically and thereby induce ventricular fibrillationâ€”a potentially deadly condition that needs to be corrected immediately.
This is the improved, edited version. How can a journalist equate 50 to 60 Hz to be close to the frequency of the human heart 60 to 120 beats/minute (1 to 2 Hz).
With corrections like this, I remember why I stopped reading the Economist.