Can't believe nobody has linked the relevant xkcd yet

Funny thing is this is a language issue, not a math issue.

Wrong: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 101%.

Right: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 2%.

Wrighongt: I had a 1% chance, and I doubled my chances. Now my chances are 3%, because I'm a lucky person.

Why lying with maths is so easy, the average person, even in developed countries is practically innumerate (massive hyperbole, but the fact lying with numbers is easy, still stands)

Having two possible outcomes does not mean it's a 50:50 chance.

"So if I aim the arrow at the 1cm square from 100m away and shoot, I either hit it or I don't. So basically I have a 50% chance of hitting it."

That's not even a stat question, it is a english question. It is an increase by 80% not to 80%
Statistics only come to play to figure out our new chances.

It's really pretty simple - if something increases by 80%, you add 80% of whatever it already is... one dollar becomes $1.80... one percent becomes 1.8 percent.

Most people don't understand it because they've seen it done wrong so often, the wrong way seems right.

In game design, it has to be stated whether it’s multiplicative or additive. Sometimes a logarithmic function is used as well, with increases in efficiency as 1 / ( 1 + bonus ). This allows you to always add more bonus, but there’s diminishing returns.

I play video games; I need to know if the percentage is additive or multiplicative.

"+100%" looks pretty good until you see what "×25%" actually gives you.

I've always wondered how to disambiguate multiplication and addition of percentages. I guess that's what percentage points are for?

In the same vein, if the volume on your phone is on 1, and you increase it to 2, it has increased by 100%

I know all this. I play DPS!

When my son was about to be born my mother in law caught wind that we didn't plan on circumcising (before researching it I mostly felt it was just strange to do cosmetic surgery on a newborn) but her argument was mostly parroting the 50% reduction in this that and the other disease, missing the fact that it was going from a 0.5% chance to a 0.25% chance, but of course introduced new risks by nature of being a surgery.

Naturally after looking more into it I learned just how bonkers circumcision is so I was far more cemented in my position

I work in a place full of statisticians, and we've had to unfortunately have numerous conversations with some of them about the difference between "a decrease" and "a decrease in the rate." Apparently "it's increasing slower" isn't clear enough for some.

well it's ambiguous. Its also a sloppy way of expressing an increase by 80 percentage points.

So you're telling me there's a chance?

Dark Souls cleared this up for me real quick.

Even more confusing when you hear that the odds of catching a disease have increased by a %. In many ways odds can be more intuitive, but we're so used to working with simple probability that it's a total nightmare to wrap your head around at first.