SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (348035)8/22/2007 5:03:22 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) of 1574122
 
"If its 1 kilo, or .5 kilos, or whatever the point is some babies in the US get counted towards the infant mortality rate that don't get counted toward that rate in other countries."

So? In the absence of more data, you can't quantify what that means. It isn't a continuum. There isn't the same proportion of babies born under 0.5 kilos as are born between 2.0 and 2.5 kilos. At a guess, there are substantially more born in the latter group than the former.

So to make this a viable argument, you have to quantify the rate of babies born this small. If the number is miniscule, which I suspect it is, whether or not you include them isn't really relevant. It doesn't substantially affect the infant mortality rate at all.

So, if this is true, then arguing that the way infant mortality is measured means you can't use it as a metric is hand waving.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News