Big Black Dog
Platinum Member
- May 20, 2009
- 23,425
- 8,069
- 890
I look for that number to go down once Health Care Reform become a reality.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I look for that number to go down once Health Care Reform become a reality.
Do we really have to dig out those stats of how the US leads in life expectancy after things like heart surgery and cancers? You know all those numbers that the WHO didn't use.....
Do we really have to dig out those stats of how the US leads in life expectancy after things like heart surgery and cancers? You know all those numbers that the WHO didn't use.....
That, when combined with the 'self reporting' methodology leaves much room for skepticism when it comes to WHO stats. Governments reporting their own figures.... nope, no reason to doubt those.
I see. The CIA is also lying to us? There data says the same.
Produce it.
Easy enough for someone with the average Liberal intellect. Pretty difficult for a Conservative, however.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
Infant mortality rate:
total: 6.26 deaths/1,000 live births
country comparison to the world: 180
male: 6.94 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.55 deaths/1,000 live births (2009 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 78.11 years
country comparison to the world: 50
male: 75.65 years
female: 80.69 years (2009 est.)
That's because the CIA use the WHO for the stats. That doesn't make the stats themselves any more accurate. Idiot.
I see. The CIA is also lying to us? There data says the same.
Produce it.
Easy enough for someone with the average Liberal intellect. Pretty difficult for a Conservative, however.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
Infant mortality rate:
total: 6.26 deaths/1,000 live births
country comparison to the world: 180
male: 6.94 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.55 deaths/1,000 live births (2009 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 78.11 years
country comparison to the world: 50
male: 75.65 years
female: 80.69 years (2009 est.)
That's because the CIA use the WHO for the stats. That doesn't make the stats themselves any more accurate. Idiot.
You'ld think they'd "sex" that one up too wouldn't you.....
Produce it.
Easy enough for someone with the average Liberal intellect. Pretty difficult for a Conservative, however.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
Infant mortality rate:
total: 6.26 deaths/1,000 live births
country comparison to the world: 180
male: 6.94 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.55 deaths/1,000 live births (2009 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 78.11 years
country comparison to the world: 50
male: 75.65 years
female: 80.69 years (2009 est.)
With the usual childlike liberal attention to details, your post- unlike mine, does not indicate what goes into those statistics.
Have someone with above average liberal intellect explain how those stats have a different
import once you understand what goes into the summary that you produce.
Review: when considering only those aspects which pertain to health care, and can be
controlled by healthcare, the United States has the longest life expectancy, and the best
healthcare in the world.
Consider the following as an indictment:
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)
That's because the CIA use the WHO for the stats. That doesn't make the stats themselves any more accurate. Idiot.
You'ld think they'd "sex" that one up too wouldn't you.....
Nope. They are meaningless stats. Any stats that are self reported cannot be taken as legitimate. It doesn't take much intellect to work out why governments might 'exaggerate' their figures.
That's because the CIA use the WHO for the stats. That doesn't make the stats themselves any more accurate. Idiot.
You'ld think they'd "sex" that one up too wouldn't you.....
Nope. They are meaningless stats. Any stats that are self reported cannot be taken as legitimate. It doesn't take much intellect to work out why governments might 'exaggerate' their figures.
The authors mention the impact of race on prematurity, but they never adjust for it. The CDC Wonder website gives us access to the same database that MacDorman used in the study. Therefore, we can adjust for race. Doing so, would put the US 14th in the rankings.
Do we really have to dig out those stats of how the US leads in life expectancy after things like heart surgery and cancers? You know all those numbers that the WHO didn't use.....
Let me help dig 'em out.
Political Chic, I would have spread some rep to you for the 1st reply about the accuracy of the statistics. It was the well thought out and worded challenge and made a similar point to mine about our miserable diet
(I swear I ate a whole Imos Pizza the other night. Thank god I'm 6'+ or this 220 lbs would be difficult to carry)
Another good point I believe from another was the "well Ted Kennedy didn't go to xxxx country for his treatment".
On a side note, I'm looking for statistics on infant mortality of African Americans compared to Caucasians of the same income level. I'd love to compare it based on age and other life choice factors but I'll settle. This ranking of us as 14th if you remove Americans of African heritage was interesting. Genetic or social/economic? I dunno.
Infant mortality report neglects the most important detail - AmyTuteurMD - Open Salon
The authors mention the impact of race on prematurity, but they never adjust for it. The CDC Wonder website gives us access to the same database that MacDorman used in the study. Therefore, we can adjust for race. Doing so, would put the US 14th in the rankings.
Do we really have to dig out those stats of how the US leads in life expectancy after things like heart surgery and cancers? You know all those numbers that the WHO didn't use.....
Let me help dig 'em out.
Just spin.
The imagined short-comings of the WHO report affect everyone. The net effect is a wash.
Do we really have to dig out those stats of how the US leads in life expectancy after things like heart surgery and cancers? You know all those numbers that the WHO didn't use.....
That, when combined with the 'self reporting' methodology leaves much room for skepticism when it comes to WHO stats. Governments reporting their own figures.... nope, no reason to doubt those.
I love this debate tactic. "<insert Country/Organization/Political Party> hates America"
I have the same question every time:
Why?
Please can someone for the love of...tell me why the WHO would find statistics which dilibratly make the US look bad?
Anyone?