As someone working in the field I struggle with this type of writing because it is both helpful but also misrepresents the fundamental problem with how statistics are messaged. Few statisticians would argue that big data driven statistics demonstrates determinism in action. Simply that certain markers are more likely than others to predict likely outcomes. None of this explains why something happened simply that it was likely it would.

In the first example of the doctor purposely killing his patients a statistician would say this doctor fit the statistically predicted outcome. But what isn't discussed is that this doctor must have existed as an anomaly within his career group. He had to have been ABNORMALLY excellent as a doctor, it is the only way he could hide his victims within his normal morbidity rates.

This is one of the reasons anomaly detection is such an interesting field because it requires dimensional understanding of a subject.