Mortality

MORTALITY. The fundamental law of population under capitalism is the law of relative overpopulation; the movement of mortality (as well as natality) is a process of a secondary order, subordinate to this fundamental law and the population structure determined by it. Only by studying the development of capitalism can one understand the dynamics of the natural movement of the population and, in particular, mortality in capitalist countries. The history of the natural movement of the population, specifically mortality, is a history of the steady growth of exploitation, the impoverishment of the proletariat, and the pauperization of other groups of the working population. This basic proposition remains true despite the fact that the dynamics of the general mortality coefficient over a long period show a significant decrease. Bourgeois demography widely advertises the general mortality coefficient and its dynamics, attempting to use the latter as proof of a "reign of prosperity" in capitalist countries. For this purpose, bourgeois science utilizes a rather complex assortment of methods. The most common method of masking the true state of affairs is the use of "average" mortality coefficients for all strata of the population, without differentiation by socio-class groups. While diligently producing all sorts of groupings by sex, age, etc. (which, of course, is also of great interest), bourgeois scientists, as a rule, "forget" about the necessity of a socio-class study of mortality. Even those who attempt to shed light on this issue present it as some additional, secondary detail not devoid of interest. Bourgeois demography has not risen (and indeed cannot rise) to an understanding of the leading role of the social factor in the problem of natality and mortality. Meanwhile, Marx wrote: "In fact, not only the number of births and deaths, but the absolute size of the families stand in inverse proportion to the height of wages, and therefore to the amount of means of subsistence of which the different categories of labourers dispose. This law of capitalistic society would sound like nonsense if applied to savages, or even to civilised colonists. It calls to mind the boundless reproduction of animals individually weak and constantly hunted down" (Marx, Capital, Vol. I, Ch. XXIII). Thus, according to Marx, the inverse proportionality of the mortality level depending on the mass of the means of subsistence is a law of capitalist society, a law stubbornly "unnoticed" by bourgeois demography. The flaw in all mortality indicators (general and age-specific, see below) also lies in the fact that they provide an idea of only one part of the cases of illness, namely those ending in death, and completely fail to illuminate the remaining cases of illness that end not in death, but in permanent or temporary disability. Thus, the mortality indicator does not reflect the actual shifts in the health of the population. The mortality coefficient is incorrectly used as a measure of the population's health if only because illnesses ending in loss of working capacity fall almost entirely on the working masses and do not affect bourgeois circles. Finally, it is incorrect to study mortality in isolation, without its interaction with natality. This method of study bears the traces of the apologetic attempts of bourgeois scientists. A correct analysis requires studying the reproducibility of the population, investigating whether individual classes of the population and the population as a whole reproduce themselves at a given stage of development of a particular socio-economic formation, and what the degree of this reproduction is. Even the most primitive indicator of population reproducibility, the so-called coefficient of natural population growth (the excess of the number of births over the number of deaths per 1,000 population), has already shown a steadily continuing decline over a long period. However, for the capitalist world, the coefficient of natural growth actually somewhat masks the real processes and smooths over the sharpest corners of the capitalist system. Special studies by the American demographer A. Lotka showed that the positive balance (excess of natality over mortality) still present for most capitalist countries (though the balance is quantitatively negligible and constantly decreasing in dynamics) is explained by a favorable age structure of the population created as a result of many years of historical layers. The difference in mortality levels for individual age groups (see below) is the key to explaining this phenomenon. The predominance of groups in ages with reduced mortality over the usual ensures a positive coefficient of natural growth. Lotka's calculations, based on the age structure that would result from the long-term maintenance of current natality and mortality rates, showed that by 1926–27, the populations of Germany, France, and England were no longer reproducing themselves. The corresponding reproducibility coefficients were: -3.37, -2.60, -6.30. Lotka's calculations show that the capitalist world has already actually transitioned from natural growth to natural decline. Widely applying methods of masking real facts, bourgeois science attempts to use the declining dynamics of the general mortality coefficient as an indicator of the "progressive mission" of capitalism. In reality, this decline represents the result of a complex intertwining of opposing trends in the development of mortality, not only for different groups of the population but for each of them individually, primarily for the proletariat. On the one hand, there are trends of a continuous increase in mortality as a reflection of the ever-intensifying exploitation of the broad working masses, and on the other hand, there are trends of decreasing mortality to the extent of the vital need for this by the bourgeoisie itself. To the latter, one must primarily attribute the fight against epidemics. Engels wrote: "Modern natural science has shown that the so-called 'bad quarters' in which the workers are crowded together are the breeding places of all those epidemics which from time to time visit our towns... The capitalist gentlemen cannot allow themselves the pleasure of spreading epidemic diseases among the working class with impunity; the consequences fall back on them and the angel of death rages among the capitalists just as ruthlessly as among the workers" (Engels, The Housing Question). The necessity for the bourgeoisie to fight epidemics became apparent as early as the era of the development of merchant capitalism, particularly maritime trade, which raised the question of the sanitary improvement of ports and points of export. The development of sanitary-technical measures for the prevention and control of epidemics caused by this circumstance, the share of which in general mortality was large, led to a significant reduction in population mortality, although, of course, far from uniformly for its individual classes. The rapid pace of population concentration in cities, primarily the growth of large cities in the era of industrial capitalism, led to an increased danger of epidemic growth. The bourgeoisie was forced to expand the network of sanitary-technical measures. In connection with the further growth of cities and the needs of the bourgeoisie itself, sanitary technology increasingly turned into an independent branch of industry, a source of additional exploitation of the working masses. As a branch of industry, sanitary-technical affairs were subordinated to and developed according to all the laws of capitalist society; in particular, they developed in the competitive struggle of individual capitalists with one another. Being at a certain stage of capitalism a stimulus for the development and expansion of production, capitalist competition contributed to the rise of sanitary technology and the sanitary-cultural level of the population. Here, incidentally, one of the contradictions of the capitalist system breaks through. Organizing sanitary affairs to save its own life and thereby strengthening itself in the struggle against the proletariat to create the possibility of increased exploitation, the bourgeoisie was forced to some extent to organize a certain sanitary minimum (albeit a very negligible one) for the workers as well. But this is not the result of the "good intentions" of the bourgeoisie, its "progressive mission," of which bourgeois scientists so love to speak, but a consequence of the iron necessity of the development of capitalism. It must also be added that for a number of leading capitalist countries, the possibility of creating a certain sanitary minimum for their workers, mainly for the labor aristocracy, was obtained at the expense of plundering colonial and semi-colonial peoples and reducing their level of existence to appallingly low levels. A significant role in the general trend of decreasing mortality was also played by the sharp drop in natality in capitalist countries, causing a parallel phenomenon of a decrease in the number of deaths in infancy. Such are the trends leading to a decrease in mortality. As for the trends toward increasing mortality, they are at first glance less obvious. As stated above, modern mortality coefficients, by their very construction, cannot reveal the actual state of the population's health, especially in a class breakdown. The trends toward the deterioration of the population's health, however, are quite clear.

These include: the growth of occupational diseases, the decline in working capacity not leading directly to death, the ever-increasing role of social diseases—venereal diseases, tuberculosis—leading to degeneration but not reflected directly in mortality, and others. Finally, an enormous role in the direct increase of mortality is played by the increasingly frequent wars characteristic of the era of capitalism. Bourgeois demography is inclined to interpret war as a phenomenon falling outside the regular course of the gradual development of capitalism. Because of this, bourgeois demography seeks to specifically isolate the mortality of war years from the general dynamic curve of mortality as "abnormal" or "catastrophic" and to contrast it with the "normal" mortality of the population in "peaceful" years. Indeed, the level of mortality of the population during the years of capitalist wars is extremely high, not only due to the military population at the front, but also to a huge extent (if not the greater part) due to the civilian population. Thus, the imperialist war of 1914–18 corresponded to a colossal rise in general mortality with a maximum of extraordinary height in 1918. The cause of this rise was the severe pandemic of the "Spanish flu," which struck with enormous lethal force the population of the entire world, exhausted by the calamities of war (see Grippe). Table 1. Mortality of the population in Western European states (ratios per 1,000 population). Austria: 1930—13.5, 1931—14.0, 1932—13.9; England and Wales: 1930—11.4, 1931—12.5, 1932—12.3; Belgium: 1930—13.2, 1931—12.7, 1932——; Germany: 1930—11.1, 1931—11.2, 1932—10.8; Denmark: 1930—10.8, 1931—11.4, 1932——; Italy: 1930—13.7, 1931—14.8, 1932—14.6; Spain: 1930—17.3, 1931—17.8, 1932—16.4; Netherlands: 1930—9.1, 1931—9.7, 1932—9.0; Norway: 1930—10.4, 1931—10.8, 1932——; France: 1930—15.7, 1931—16.3, 1932—15.8; Switzerland: 1930—11.6, 1931—12.1, 1932—12.2; Sweden: 1930—11.7, 1931—12.6, 1932—11.6; Bulgaria: 1930—16.8, 1931—16.3, 1932——; Hungary: 1930—15.3, 1931—16.6, 1932—17.8; Ireland: 1930—14.1, 1931—14.6, 1932—14.4; Latvia: 1930—14.2, 1931—13.8, 1932—13.6; Lithuania: 1930—15.9, 1931—15.8, 1932—15.2; Poland: 1930—15.8, 1931—16.5, 1932—15.0; Portugal: 1930—18.8, 1931—17.2, 1932—17.5; Romania: 1930—19.4, 1931—20.3, 1932—21.7; Finland: 1930—13.2, 1931—13.3, 1932——; Czechoslovakia: 1930—14.2, 1931—14.3, 1932—14.1; Scotland: 1930—13.2, 1931—13.3, 1932—14.9; Estonia: 1930—16.0, 1931—14.9, 1932——. Bourgeois scientists do not understand the circumstance that wars are not extraordinary phenomena at the current stage of the development of capitalism, but, on the contrary, are internally inherent to it, are inextricably linked with it, and are for it a completely "normal" phenomenon. If one adds the "war years" to the so-called "peaceful years," then the analysis of mortality will show a somewhat different picture compared to that usually painted by bourgeois scientists, and the halo of ever-decreasing mortality will significantly fade, even if one takes this indicator as a characteristic of the actual "state of health" of the population, which in itself is very conditional. Table 2. Mortality of the population in the states of Asia, Africa, America, and Australia (per 1,000 population). States: Asia—Japan (1928: 20.0, 1930: 18.2), Ceylon (1928: 24.6, 1930: 24.4), British India (1928: 26.0, 1930: 21.6), Philippines (1928: 27.4, 1930: 22.3); Africa—Egypt (1928: 25.1, 1930: 23.7), Union of South Africa (1928: 9.5, 1930: 9.7); America—Costa Rica (1928: 24.0, 1930: 18.4), El Salvador (1928: 14.3, 1930: 12.5), Argentina (1928: 13.6, 1930: 12.5), Chile (1928: 25.1, 1930: 23.7), Uruguay (1928: 10.7, 1930: 10.5), Venezuela (1928: 16.8, 1930: 19.0); Australia—Commonwealth of Australia (1928: 9.5, 1930: 8.6, 1931: 8.6), New Zealand (1928: 8.5, 1930: 9.3, 1931: 8.3). The peculiarities of the capitalist development of individual countries, primarily the differences between metropolitan countries and colonies, are vividly reflected in the level and dynamics of mortality. A comparison of the data in Tables 1 and 2 shows us that for colonial countries, with the observed dynamics of mortality, this dynamic is slower and the level of mortality in the colonies is more than 1¹/₂–2 times higher than the level of mortality in the so-called advanced countries. Thus, for example, in Table 3, deaths per 1,000 population are: Table 3. Name of country: England and Wales (1932)—12.3; British India (1932)—26.0; Sweden (1928)—11.7; Portugal (1928)—18.8. Such a gap in mortality levels is obtained even without adding the undercounting of the number of deaths in colonial and semi-colonial countries, which is very significant. Marxist analysis requires the mandatory study of mortality in a socio-class cross-section as the leading aspect of the matter. Above, we cited Marx's proposition on the law of the inverse dependence of mortality on the mass of means of subsistence. Elsewhere, Marx expresses the same thought in a slightly different form: "Dr. Lee, the medical officer of health for Manchester, established that in this city the average duration of life for the wealthy class is 38 years, for the working class—only 17 years. In Liverpool, it is 35 years for the first and 15 years for the second. It follows from this that the privileged class receives from life an allotment twice as large as the class of their fellow citizens who are in less favorable conditions" (Capital, Vol. I, Ch. XXIII). A whole series of research works has confirmed the correctness of the propositions put forward by Marx. A study of the mortality of the population by social groups was conducted as early as the last century in Denmark, in the city of Copenhagen (Sorensen). The first group consisted of workers and servants; the second—artisans, small traders; the third—merchants, higher employees. In all groups, the force of mortality was determined by age classes, separately for men and women. It turned out that at all ages, general mortality follows a correctly decreasing order when moving from the working group to the middle group and from the middle to the higher group. Completely analogous results were obtained in France in a study of occupational mortality in 1907–08 (Huber) with the determination of age-specific mortality coefficients for 3 social groups—owners, employees, and workers. The same was established in the Netherlands (occupational mortality 1908–11) by age-specific mortality in connection with social status, with a division of owners and workers in agriculture and industry. The processing of occupational mortality of the population in England (1921–23) on the basis of 5 social groups (upper classes, entrepreneurs, skilled workers, semi-skilled workers, unskilled workers) also established a gradual increase in mortality with the transition from the higher to the lower. In another series of studies, the significance of the economic factor in a narrower sense for life expectancy and the force of mortality is traced. One of the first observations in this direction belongs to the famous French statistician Bertillon, who, using materials from European capitals—Paris, Berlin, and Vienna (1901–05)—established that the mortality of the child population from infectious diseases is distributed among the districts of these cities in direct dependence on the material insecurity of the inhabitants of these districts. In the city of London (1902), a comparative study of the mortality of the population in two districts—rich and poor—was made; it was found that at all ages of both sexes, the mortality of the population of the poor district is much higher than in the rich district. For the city of Paris, a comparison of the prosperity of the population with the force of its mortality was conducted (1911–13) for all 20 districts of the city; a complete parallelism of the increase in mortality with the growth of poverty of the inhabitants was established (Hersh). A number of analogous observations are also available in the literature of Germany (for the city of Bremen, for the districts of the city of Hamburg, for the districts of the city of Braunschweig). Comparisons of the mortality of the population with the density of the population in dwellings, made in Hungary (Budapest), Austria (Vienna), and England (London), are also instructive. Among Russian works, one can point to studies of the mortality of the population of St. Petersburg by city districts in connection with the economic indicators of the latter. A parallelism of decreasing economic prosperity and increasing general, child, and tuberculosis mortality in the districts of the city has been established. Confirmation of the same regularity was also found in data on the spread of the typhus epidemic (1909–10, S. A. Novoselsky). A vivid indicator of the dependence of the mortality level of individual groups of the population on the position they occupy on the social ladder can be seen in a comparison of the mortality coefficients of the white and black populations of the USA. The mortality coefficient of the US population in 1927 (deaths per 1,000 population): for the white population—10.8, and in cities—11.6; for the colored population—17.5, and in cities—22.2. Thus, the higher mortality of the working and exploited masses is an immutable fact in capitalist society and is explained by the immediate conditions of labor—the cruelest exploitation, unemployment in all its forms, etc., an extremely low level of material well-being, and difficult living conditions—overcrowding, unsanitary housing, etc. Within individual social groups, the mortality of the population must be further studied differentially by sex and age of the population. Observations on differences in sexual mortality have shown that the mortality of the male population is generally higher than that of the female. In most capitalist states, this excess of male mortality over female mortality is 1–2%. The process of "dying out" among the male half of the population occurs somewhat more rapidly than in the female half; the average life expectancy for men is shorter than for women. This phenomenon is explained by the different participation in productive labor of men and women. The increasing participation of women in the production process and social activity under the conditions of capitalism acts toward bringing the indicators of general mortality of the male and female population closer together.

The age composition of the deceased is determined as the percentage of age groups in the total mass of the dead and reveals a significant difference in various states and population groups, primarily due to the level of infant mortality and mortality of the population in old age. Age-specific mortality fluctuates sharply for different ages. The maximum mortality falls on the first period of human life (in the first hours, days, weeks, and months of life; mortality is higher the closer it is to the moment of birth). Then mortality decreases and reaches a minimum for the age of 14–15 years, after which a continuous increase in the mortality rate begins, initially very slow, then increasingly rapid, reaching a second maximum in the oldest ages. The difference in the age-sex structure of the population for individual classes and social groups, with sharp fluctuations in age-sex mortality coefficients, makes general mortality coefficients of little use and highlights the need for a differentiated consideration of age-sex coefficients for different classes and social groups of the population. Such a study allows for the elimination of the age-sex characteristics of each social group and a deeper penetration into the social essence of the phenomenon of mortality. The characteristics of the social and age-sex structure of the population of individual states, and within the latter—the urban and rural population and finally individual settlements—reflecting their socio-economic characteristics against the background of the general stage of development of the capitalist system, are reflected in the differences in the levels and dynamics of mortality for the listed types of settlements, individual states, and cities (Tables 1, 2, 4, and 5). Dynamics of mortality in Russia and the USSR. The mortality of the population in European Russia has been recorded with more accurate figures since the late 1860s. Throughout this period of observation, a clear parallelism between the birth rate and mortality of the population is found at much higher levels compared to all other states in Europe. In the dynamics of the numbers, increases in mortality mark all the decisive moments in Russian history in terms of sanitation and epidemics: 1871–1872—a severe cholera epidemic; 1878—the Russo-Turkish War; 1882—crop failure and epidemics; 1892—famine and cholera; 1905—the Japanese War; 1910—cholera, crop failure. The movement of the birth rate in Russia is much more uniform than mortality; however, even here, critical years are marked by a sharp drop (1877–78, 1892, 1901, 1905, 1912) (Table 6). A quite distinct expression is also given to the long-term decrease in both phenomena. At the beginning of the observations, the mortality of the Russian population was at levels of 37–38‰ and on the eve of the World War at a level of 26–27‰; the birth rate at the same time was 49–51‰ and 43–44‰. With the beginning of the World War, the continuity of statistical observations of population movement was interrupted; they gained greater completeness in the USSR from 1923–24. From this point, statistics already state the onset of a new era in the sanitary state of the country, characterized by incomparably more favorable indicators. New trends in the development of mortality, associated with the characteristics of the Soviet system, are particularly clearly demonstrated in the detailed studied materials of Moscow and Leningrad (Table 7). The pre-war period (1910–14) corresponds to a uniformly high general mortality in both cities, slightly above 20‰; the transition period—the war, its liquidation, a severe epidemic of influenza and typhus, the Civil War—is marked by large fluctuations in mortality with an unprecedented rise in 1919, especially in Leningrad; in 1923, a new era of regular, uniform reduction in the mortality of the population of the Soviet capitals opens, at a level almost 2 times more favorable than was the case in former times. The movement of mortality in the USSR in comparison with the capitalist countries of Europe shows a significantly faster rate of its reduction in the USSR. Therefore, with a simultaneous more favorable movement of the birth rate in the USSR, the natural increase of the population in the USSR significantly exceeds the analogous indicator in Western Europe. The number of deaths in the USSR in 1930 compared to 1913 fell by 23%, while in Europe it fell by only 13.1%. As a result of this, as well as the more favorable movement of the birth rate, the 160-million population of the USSR (in 1930) gives the same natural increase as the 360-million population of Europe without the USSR. This is the best proof that only with the transition to the building of socialism, and even more so to the direct construction of a classless society, does a genuine struggle against the mortality of the broad working masses begin, and only then does the reduction in mortality become truly general. “As a result of the implementation of the Bolshevik rates of socialist construction and the liquidation of basically parasitic classes—already in the first five-year plan, the main sources of exploitation of man by man are liquidated, the national income grows at rates unattainable for capitalist countries, unemployment and poverty (pauperism) are destroyed, the ‘price scissors’ and the opposition between city and country are being destroyed, the welfare and cultural level of workers and laboring peasants grow from year to year, mortality falls, and the population of the USSR rapidly increases” (from the resolution of the XVII Party Conference). The further development of the national economy of the USSR, the improvement of the material and cultural level of the broad masses of the working population of the USSR, the transformation of all collective farms into Bolshevik collective farms, and collective farmers into prosperous ones—will undoubtedly ensure a further steady reduction in mortality. Statistics of causes of death. For a long time, there has been a desire to study mortality not only as a whole but also in terms of the diseases leading to death, or, as is customary to say, by causes of death. However, this study took the proper direction from the point of view of modern requirements for the statistics of causes of death from the end of the last, and partly the beginning of the present century, when through the efforts of international scientific thought, a number of methodological and organizational prerequisites for the correct organization of this branch of statistics were developed. By a special commission organized by the International Statistical Institute... [Table 4: General mortality of the population in the main cities of Western European states 1928–1931 (per 1000 population). Names of states: Spain (Seville, Granada, Barcelona, Madrid), Portugal (Lisbon), Greece (Athens, Piraeus), France (Bordeaux, Lille, Marseille, Paris), Italy (Naples, Venice, Milan, Rome), Great Britain (Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, London), Poland (Warsaw, Lodz), Austria (Vienna), Estonia (Riga [sic]), Hungary (Budapest), Germany (Dresden, Munich, Berlin, Hamburg), Switzerland (Geneva, Zurich), Bulgaria (Sofia), Czechoslovakia (Prague), Holland (Amsterdam, The Hague), Belgium (Brussels), Denmark (Copenhagen), Sweden (Stockholm), Norway (Oslo). Table 5: General mortality of the population in the main cities of Africa, North and South America, Asia, and Australia. Names of cities: I. Africa: Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, Tunis, Algiers, Johannesburg. II. North America: Mexico City, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Washington, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Cleveland, Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, New York. III. South America: Santiago, Salvador, Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires. IV. Asia: Calcutta, Singapore, Hong Kong, Bombay, Yokohama, Osaka, Kobe, Tokyo. V. Australia: Sydney, Melbourne.]

Adelaide 324 1 196 331 646 222 202 262 206 3 393 1 283 1 586 7 218 2 167 1197 446 627 1 299 735 2 604 854 2 102 and 40.0 40.4 33.0 36.8 33.2 27.1 25.8 29.0 30.1 28.7 26.9 30.3 24.4 27.3 23.5 27.9 23.8 24.8 20.1 23.0 22.4 23.3 21.6 24.7 18.6 18.8 17.2 17.0 12.3 11.8 12.8 12.3 24.1 28.9 26.3 27.6 18.3 16.8 15.5 15.6 15.1 14.5 13.9 14.2 15.2 15.4 15.2 15.9 14.0 13.1 12.6 12.8 13.5 12.7 13.0 13.1 11.7 12.3 11.0 11.0 12.1 11.2 10.4 10.4 10.2 11.4 11.1 10.8 11.6 11.6 19.3 8.1 11.6 11.3 10.8 10.9 17 6 21.2 25.1 27.7 20.2 20.6 20.4 - 14.7 15.0 14.4 14.7 12.9 13.7 12.7 - 29.4 28.1 26.3 28.5 27.0 24.9 26.3 24.2 25.8 27.7 27.0 23.5 23.4 22.8 23.7 19.4 19.9 20.3 15.6 17.5 16.8 17.7 15.4 18.8 16.8 18.8 16.7 18.3 14.8 14.6 13.0 14.8 9.3 10.2 8.7 9.0 10.2 9.3 8.9 9.6 9.8 9.4 9.2 9.8 institute, an international nomenclature and classification of diseases and causes of death was developed (see Nomenclature of Diseases), which significantly facilitated the comparative study of the causes of mortality in different states and large urban centers. In the works of individual sessions of the named institute, considerable space and attention were devoted to the exchange of experience on the organization and methodology of medical registration of causes of death, which contributed to the clarification and promotion of correct ideas in this field. Similar work was also carried out by it in establishing a unified program for processing observations on the causes of death. Finally, in the most recent period, this same organization has done a great deal of work in publishing comparative data on the causes of death in the cities and states of Europe and America. It must be noted, however, that in all these undoubtedly very large and important works, the International Statistical Institute remained, of course, faithful to the precepts of bourgeois science, called into the service of capitalism, and firmly guarded the scientific sector entrusted to it by capitalism (see Nomenclature of Diseases). Furthermore, it should also be noted that the recommendations in the field of statistics of causes of death that emanated from the International Institute were not always implemented in the various countries that were members of it. Table 6. Mortality and birth rate of the population in European Russia for 1867–1914 (per 1,000 inhabitants). Years: Mortality, Birth rate. 1867: 36.8, 51.2; 1868: 39.7, 48.8; 1869: 38.3, 49.7; 1870: 35.0, 49.2; 1871: 37.9, 51.0; 1872: 41.2, 50.0; 1873: 36.5, 52.3; 1874: 35.2, 51.4; 1875: 34.6, 51.5; 1876: 34.9, 50.6; 1877: 34.4, 49.6; 1878: 38.2, 47.3; 1879: 34.8, 50.2; 1880: 36.1, 49.7; 1881: 34.1, 49.1; 1882: 40.4, 51.6; 1883: 37.5, 50.6; 1884: 44.4, 51.5; 1885: 35.8, 50.0; 1886: 33.2, 49.5; 1887: 33.3, 50.4; 1888: 31.4, 50.0; 1889: 33.2, 48.6; 1890: 31.2, 49.3; 1891: 31.1, 49.3; 1892: 32.1, 47.9; 1893: 31.3, 49.1; 1894: 30.0, 48.1; 1895: 29.9, 48.6; 1896: 31.7, 45.0; 1897: 39.9, 47.1; 1898: 23.4, 47.5; 1899: 28.3, 44.8; 1900: 29.5, 44.7; 1901: 31.5, 45.1; 1902: 27.4, 45.0; 1903: 26.5, 48.7; 1904: 27.4, 43.1; 1905: 26.7, 43.7; 1870–1874: 37.4, 50.8; 1875–1879: 35.4, 49.8; 1880–1884: 36.5, 50.5; 1885–1889: 34.5, 50.3; 1890–1894: 36.4, 48.9; 1895–1899: 33.0, 49.5; 1900–1904: 30.9, 48.6; 1905–1909: 29.4, 45.8; 1910–1914: 27.9, 44.1. 1906: 33.8, 49.9; 1907: 33.4, 51.6; 1908: 35.5, 50.3; 1909: 36.7, 49.6; 1910: 35.8, 50.6; 1911: 41.0, 46.0; 1912: 34.4, 48.8; 1913: 34.3, 49.2; 1914: 35.5, 50.1. Frequently, in their implementation, they were given a content that met the interests of the given country. During the regular revision of the nomenclature and classification of causes of death at the International Conference in Paris in 1929, the Soviet delegation submitted its own project for studying mortality as one of the indicators in the complex characterization of shifts in the health of the population, and a project for constructing a nomenclature and classification of causes of death corresponding to such an understanding. In a number of speeches at the conference, the scientific validity of the project and its progressiveness were noted; however, it clearly did not correspond to the class positions of bourgeois statistics of causes of death. Therefore, for formal reasons, the Soviet project was not even put up for discussion. The nomenclature and classification of causes of death approved by the Economic-Statistical Sector of Gosplan of the USSR (since 1932, TsUNKHU) in 1930, which is mandatory for all work carried out in the USSR, is constructed in accordance with the Soviet project presented at the International Conference. However, a number of changes (mostly not of a fundamental nature) have been made to it, necessary for the comparability of data on causes of death in the USSR and in capitalist countries. Statistics of causes of death in most countries are built on the basis of observations by physicians who treated the deceased before death, or on the basis of medical examinations of corpses performed by appropriate persons. In England, Scotland, Holland, Switzerland, and Italy, more than 90% of the statistics of causes of death are built on the basis of observations by physicians who treated the deceased. Regarding the urban population of France, it is also built on medical observations; for the non-urban population, only partially, since the presentation of a medical certificate for death registration is mandatory there only if the patient received medical assistance before death. In certain districts of Bavaria and Saxony, the source of statistics of causes of death was the records of non-physician "corpse examiners." The content of medical records on causes of death varies greatly. In some countries, they contain only the cause of death, surname, address, and age of the deceased (England, Holland, cities of Belgium); in others, in addition, a number of statistical attributes (France, Germany, etc.). In the former Russia, statistics of causes of death developed only in cities. In 1913, it existed in 120 cities with 9 million inhabitants. Here in the USSR, statistics of causes of death are maintained by the organs of TsUNKHU for the entire urban population. For statistical data on mortality from individual diseases and their groups, see the corresponding entries. Methods of measurement. The simplest and at the same time generally accepted indicator of mortality of individual states, regions, and similar administrative-territorial associations and collectives is the so-called crude mortality rate (or coefficient). It represents the number of deaths occurring on average for every thousand of the population per year. Mathematically, it is expressed in the form of the ratio of the total number of deaths (D) during the year to the average number of inhabitants (P) among whom the cases of death were observed, reduced to a thousand (D/P * 1000). Like all crude indicators, the mortality coefficient is an average value that levels out all the features that may be inherent in individual groups of the population and arise from the nature of its social and age-sex composition, etc. But despite this weak side of it as an analytical measure, it has nevertheless been widely used until now, since comparing it with another indicator similar in content (the birth rate) allows one to determine the main features of the process of population reproduction in the simplest and sufficiently expressive form. Its shortcomings, utilized by the statistics of capitalist countries, are noted above. Recently, even bourgeois statistics have begun to recognize the inadequacy of the crude mortality coefficient in view of the major changes and shifts in the composition of the population of different states that arose after the World War and especially during the years of the economic crisis. In order to clarify the features inherent in mortality, "specific" mortality indicators are constructed by sex, individual age groups, collectives of different socio-class positions, etc. All specific indicators also represent ratios between the numbers of death cases grouped by a given attribute and the average numbers of the population of the given group, reduced in each case to 1,000 (or 10,000, 100,000, etc.). The presence of specific mortality indicators allows one not only to orient oneself in the features and details of mortality but also to present its crude indicators in a comparative form, freeing them from the influence of age and other differences. The latter is achieved by converting crude indicators into indices or standardized indicators. For a detailed study of the features observed in age-specific mortality and the changes in the population associated with it, a special method of measuring mortality is used in the form of so-called mortality tables (or life tables). A mortality table represents in numerical expression the order of extinction of a certain group of births (or peers), in which this group gradually decreases in its numerical composition with each year of age under the influence of extinction. In its usual structure, the table contains the following elements: a) the number of persons surviving to each subsequent year of age, starting from 0 to 100 years; b) the number of those dying during the transition from one age to the next (one-year age intervals); c) the probability of dying during the next year of life; d) the probability of remaining alive during the year; e) the average life expectancy for each year of life, and f) the probable life expectancy. Let us note here that the average life expectancy represents the number of years that, on average, a person of the studied population is expected to live upon reaching a certain year of life. Depending on age and mortality conditions, this value is different for different ages. Probable life expectancy shows the number of years after which half of the persons who reached the taken age remain alive.

The first official mortality table for the population of the USSR was constructed for the years 1926–27. Practical significance belongs to the calculation of the population's survival to the military conscription age (20–21 years), which determines what percentage of newborn boys reach the age of conscription. Sanitary statistics used this indicator among the signs for assessing the sanitary condition of individual localities (parallel with infant mortality data).