The curious case of Lifespan VS Lost in the Wilderness

[Greater Hunnia]

There seems to be a serious fallacy in the way Average Lifespan is calculated. Understandably, there is a corelation between Average Lifespan and Enviromental Beauty. However, having a "too good" enviroment will cause deaths by people getting lost in the wilderness. Basically even if a nation's population is dying en masse, like, 60-70% die due to getting lost, the nation's average lifespan can be absurdly high. Getting lost in the wilderness is definetaly a preventable cause of death. Average Lifespan is appearently NOT a function of how many people die due to old age and not preventable causes, as it is stated by its description, and as it would be dictated by common sense.

[Trotterdam]

Common sense would also dictate that your nation not have a 17.1% Lost in Wilderness death rate which cannot be reduced even with extensive search-and-rescue operations.

(Why are that many people even entering the wilderness?)

[Ballotonia]

Basically even if a nation's population is dying en masse, like, 60-70% die due to getting lost, the nation's average lifespan can be absurdly high.

The percentages listed are not an annual death rate. It's a description which lists for all the people who die (however many or few that may be) what their cause of death was. If old people love the outdoors so much they purposely wander into it when they feel their 'end' coming, then that's their choice. A simple NS-style solution would be to cut down all them trees...

Ballotonia