We're number 37 !!!!!!!!!!!


Unbelievable. We seem to go through this outright lie every few months.

It is a simple concept. There are NO uniform reporting procedures, each Country is free to report what it wants based on what it determines is appropriate.

Example...

Live births. The US reports every birth that occurs that the infant is alive ON BIRTH. No matter the viability of keeping said infant alive. Other Countries do not. Some have a waiting period during which if the infant dies, it is NOT considered to have been a live birth. Each individual Country determines how it will determine what it reports and there are NO uniform procedures.

This means trying to compare countries across the world is a waste of time.
 
What an absurd post.

And absurd is the kindest that I could be.

If you have any friends that are actually literate, have them read the thread to you, and perhaps they can make clear to you that homicides and auto deaths are not the fault of healthcare.

And, as far as the brillian "Surprise surprise, there are Africans in Europe," "The US has the highest proportion of women of African descent of any first world country."

When your IQ reaches 50, you should sell.

Nice to see you are keeping it classy as ever.......

The point still remains that all countries in the study were graded impartially on the criteria set forth by the WHO.
If the result is not to your liking, then tough. No participant gets to cut out the ugly bits because it makes them look bad.

Check out these few gems....
NationMaster - Health Statistics
Deaths from cancer, the US ranks #9. I'm sure that the 8 above it would like to cut out those statistics because obviously its a cultural thing...
Or how about Suicide rates? The US is #30. Obviously the 29 above have cultural issues...best if they could cut those numbers out...
Heart disease? The US is joint #5 with the UK. I wish my country could cut out that particular statistic, but we don't get to.
The US is #68 in HIV AIDS and 143 in child malnutrition. But if you take those cultural statistics out, then all of those poor African countries start to look mighty sweet.....
 
Even setting those concerns aside, the rankings are still highly sensitive to both measurement error and assumptions about the relative importance of the components.

As does every attempt to dismiss them. The difference is the standards for the assumptions. The WHO ranking reflects standards observed by most of the industrialized world. The CATO attempt to dismiss the WHO ranking represent those of special interests. Given a choice between the reasonable standards of the WHO and CATO's spin, the WHO ranking is better.

I'm curious. Do you actually imagine that choosing one sentence out of a rather long post to respond to impresses anyone or makes us think you're anything but a partisan hack?

When you grow a pair and can answer the entire post honestly and thoughtfully, come back and see me. Until then, don't even bother, because you're just a cowardly waste of pixels.

Are you saying the sentence I quoted doesn't reflect your opinion? In what way?

Frankly, I agree with it. Every ranking based on multiple attributes certainly will reflect value judgements. Isn't that what you were trying to say?
 
Even setting those concerns aside, the rankings are still highly sensitive to both measurement error and assumptions about the relative importance of the components.

As does every attempt to dismiss them. The difference is the standards for the assumptions. The WHO ranking reflects standards observed by most of the industrialized world. The CATO attempt to dismiss the WHO ranking represent those of special interests. Given a choice between the reasonable standards of the WHO and CATO's spin, the WHO ranking is better.

Would that be the OA or the OP?

What is "OA?"
 

Unbelievable. We seem to go through this outright lie every few months.

It is a simple concept. There are NO uniform reporting procedures, each Country is free to report what it wants based on what it determines is appropriate.

Example...

Live births. The US reports every birth that occurs that the infant is alive ON BIRTH. No matter the viability of keeping said infant alive. Other Countries do not. Some have a waiting period during which if the infant dies, it is NOT considered to have been a live birth. Each individual Country determines how it will determine what it reports and there are NO uniform procedures.

This means trying to compare countries across the world is a waste of time.

When even the WHO itself is skeptical of its own stats, I think that tells us a significant amount. You cannot take self reported figures as accurate, therefore the US could be 37, it could be 1, it could be 137. There is no legitimate way to be sure. Add in the discrepancies on the way the figures are reported and basically the WHO stats are meaningless as evidence for or against a single payer system.
 
I'll settle with figuring the U.S. is someplace around #37. When I first read it I figured 27 to 47 was a probable range. Our docs are sure to lie about something as well. Sure as a country on the whole we're overweight. I'm sure the Irish drink too much beer. The Mexicans eat too many beans. The Somali's are malnourished. None of any of that is their doctor's fault.
 
As does every attempt to dismiss them. The difference is the standards for the assumptions. The WHO ranking reflects standards observed by most of the industrialized world. The CATO attempt to dismiss the WHO ranking represent those of special interests. Given a choice between the reasonable standards of the WHO and CATO's spin, the WHO ranking is better.

Would that be the OA or the OP?

What is "OA?"

The first thing to realize about the WHO health care ranking system is that there is more than one. One ranking claims to measure “overall attainment” (OA) while another claims to measure “overall performance” (OP) . . . When using the WHO rankings, one should specify which ranking is being used: OA or OP.
Cecilie1200
 
i have never heard of anyone waiting months for x-rays. but do you think even if that were the case, that someone who couldn't have had the x-ray at all would care?

there is no "I can't afford it" in Canada. because it's socialized. If socialism works so well in medicine, why don't they implement it in other sectors? Doesn't Medicaid cover X-rays? I'll be back in a while.

You re missing the whole point of a healthcare system: it is supposed to take care of all the people that live in a nation. It s like the US army that is supposed to protect all americans, healthcare should be seen in the same category. A government should protect its people from harm and give them the means to protect themselves, a private healthcare industry does not do this: just like a private army wouldn't do it either.

And if you ve noticed: it is implemented in other sectors (the police, the fire department, justice system, the government itself: politicians have healthcare payed for by the taxpayers, ...)

Why do I always get cold chills every time one of you adolescents blithely trots out the phrase "should be"?

Demonstrate for me, please, the "should be" in healthcare being viewed as similar to the army, as opposed to a commodity similar to, say, food.
 
Nice to see you are keeping it classy as ever.......

The point still remains that all countries in the study were graded impartially on the criteria set forth by the WHO.
If the result is not to your liking, then tough. No participant gets to cut out the ugly bits because it makes them look bad.

Check out these few gems....
NationMaster - Health Statistics
Deaths from cancer, the US ranks #9. I'm sure that the 8 above it would like to cut out those statistics because obviously its a cultural thing...
Or how about Suicide rates? The US is #30. Obviously the 29 above have cultural issues...best if they could cut those numbers out...
Heart disease? The US is joint #5 with the UK. I wish my country could cut out that particular statistic, but we don't get to.
The US is #68 in HIV AIDS and 143 in child malnutrition. But if you take those cultural statistics out, then all of those poor African countries start to look mighty sweet.....

Oh, for God's sake. The point, Brain Trust, since you can't seem to find it unless someone smacks you across the face with it, is that it doesn't matter how "impartially" you apply your criteria when the fucking criteria themselves are biased.

Now would you like me to explain that the sky is blue and water is wet, or can you manage those tricky permutations yourself?
 
Oh, for God's sake. The point, Brain Trust, since you can't seem to find it unless someone smacks you across the face with it, is that it doesn't matter how "impartially" you apply your criteria when the fucking criteria themselves are biased.

Now would you like me to explain that the sky is blue and water is wet, or can you manage those tricky permutations yourself?

You do realise that you come across as an arrogant tosspot in every post, which is why most people ignore your blather.

Your self-aggrandizing, self-promotion as the be-all and end-all of any subject might work in the trailer park, but on here you seem nothing but a vacuous, busy-body who knows fuck-all, while trying to come across as the Grand Mufti of all subjects.

Pull your head and start posting to people with respect you loser....
 
You do realise that you come across as an arrogant tosspot in every post, which is why most people ignore your blather.

Your self-aggrandizing, self-promotion as the be-all and end-all of any subject might work in the trailer park, but on here you seem nothing but a vacuous, busy-body who knows fuck-all, while trying to come across as the Grand Mufti of all subjects.

Pull your head and start posting to people with respect you loser....

If you are stating that that post is my language, my post, you are either in error or outright lying.

While I try to avoid the term 'lie,' this post is you are attributing it to me, is a fabricated slander.

You should apologize.
__________________
 
You do realise that you come across as an arrogant tosspot in every post, which is why most people ignore your blather.

Your self-aggrandizing, self-promotion as the be-all and end-all of any subject might work in the trailer park, but on here you seem nothing but a vacuous, busy-body who knows fuck-all, while trying to come across as the Grand Mufti of all subjects.

Pull your head and start posting to people with respect you loser....

Sir, the post originally said 'PoliticalChic' as writer of the post.

Am I to understand that you now changed the quote to 'Alvin'?
 
You do realise that you come across as an arrogant tosspot in every post, which is why most people ignore your blather.

Your self-aggrandizing, self-promotion as the be-all and end-all of any subject might work in the trailer park, but on here you seem nothing but a vacuous, busy-body who knows fuck-all, while trying to come across as the Grand Mufti of all subjects.

Pull your head and start posting to people with respect you loser....

I see, you have taken post #109 and erroneously attributed same to me.

You do owe me an apology.
 
I see, you have taken post #109 and erroneously attributed same to me.

You do owe me an apology.

He doesn't owe you anything. Anyone with any sense can just look up a couple of posts and see that Cecille wrote that and that the quotes are all fucked up.
 
I see, you have taken post #109 and erroneously attributed same to me.

You do owe me an apology.

He doesn't owe you anything. Anyone with any sense can just look up a couple of posts and see that Cecille wrote that and that the quotes are all fucked up.

Anyone with a sense of honor would know that an apology is owed...but that lets you out.
 
I see, you have taken post #109 and erroneously attributed same to me.

You do owe me an apology.

He doesn't owe you anything. Anyone with any sense can just look up a couple of posts and see that Cecille wrote that and that the quotes are all fucked up.

Anyone with a sense of honor would know that an apology is owed...but that lets you out.

Fuck off, ****. How's that for some potty mouth?
 
Anyone with a sense of honor would know that an apology is owed...but that lets you out.

Fuck off, ****. How's that for some potty mouth?

And in some way you think that is clever?

Some upbringing.

Clever? No.

I wasn't aiming for that.

I was calling you a **** because you were acting like a ****. So how about you go **** it up elsewhere? This situation has been resolved.

You're welcome BTW.
 

Forum List

Back
Top