Sir – I find it sad when otherwise well-written articles let themselves down with careless and sometimes misleading interpretations of changes to numbers.

I refer to two items last week. First on page 3, your writer, Fran Bardsley, talks about Oxford’s rainfall in April last as “three times more than usual” when it isn’t and in your letters page 27, correspondent Roger Evans discusses possible residence changes at Plater Hall in terms of “a 500 per cent increase” which is also an exaggeration.

First the rainfall: It was 142mm compared with an average of 45mm (from websites). This is “(more than) three times as much”. The words “as much” and “more” are not interchangeable; they have different meanings. The increase was 97mm which is “(over) two times more” — and not “three times more” as was written.

Second the proposals for Plater Hall. Mr Evans mentions the former 150 residents possibly rising to 750. This is “five times as much”. The increase is 600 which is “a 400 per cent increase”, not 500 per cent.

In order to retain their credibility it would be helpful then if writers would take more care in their interpretations of rises to figures. Otherwise they will be criticised for false statements in order to sensationalise their narratives.

Dr Tony Lewis, Headington