I agree, nice graphic. On the other hand, is the average dog bite really more to be afraid of than the typical shark attack? I think most shark attacks end in death… so we shouldn’t just compare based on numbers, as it seems the graphic does. The “scarier” incidients are so because there are more unknowns and they are more out of our control – we know what to expect with flu, so it’s nothing out of the ordinary. I’m not saying deaths from flu shouldn’t be prevented – just that it partly seems to explain why a terrorist attack is more scary.

I can’t accurately comment that the fatality of a shark attack is greater than a dog attack, but I’d say your observation is probably spot on.

But I think the common denominator in this stuff is the attention (or marketing) many of the lower occurrence events receive.

As you say, when you factor in the randomness or unfamiliarity of the event, it just further plays on the fears and irrational behavior of said event.

Much like the media attention about “swine flu” during the 2009 flu season, CNN only compounded the difficulties in irrational behavior by choosing to beat the proverbial dead horse. Never mind that thousands die from “regular flu” every year, but I suppose they followed the “while we the music is playing, we must dance (to sell advertising dollars).”