A US National Health Care System? Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : A US National Health Care System?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (12012)	12/2/2009 6:39:56 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) of 42652

She's stating the result of a calculation. You mean subtracting 79 from 90. Sure that is invalid and the math is wrong but I'm still more interested in the bigger point cuting back mammograms would increase breast cancer deaths. Only the knowledge that early detection is very important and shouldn't be considered trivial, and I'd call a guesstimate of 1% trivial. So, you pick a number that sounds sufficiently important rather than a number that is valid. 1% is not valid. Women diagnosed with breast cancer by a routine mammogram have a 95 percent chance of surviving. For women diagnosed later, who haven't received routine mammograms, the chance of dying is 56 percent." Well, 95 and 56 are nice numbers just as 11 is a nice number. They're not just "nice numbers". They're real percentages reflecting real data. Maybe cutting back on mammograms for forty-somethings will reduce the survival rate by 95 percent or 56 percent rather than the author's 11 percent...LOL. Seriously, that's interesting information but it doesn't inform the question of how much the US survival rate would be reduced by the cutbacks. When the chance of dying if you get breast is 5% with mammograms and 56% without that tells me the benefits of early mammograms is substantial and they have a big impact on the survival rate. Definitely more than the trivial 1% or wash you have been pushing. It seems that routine regular mammograms reduce the chance of dying of breast cancer from 56% to 5% for women who get breast cancer overall. That confirms my understanding. I see no reason why it wouldn't be true of women in their 40's too Except that it's not true. You're disputing a site you posted from now: allbusiness.com "The study was conducted by Dr. Blake Cady of Cambridge Hospital Breast Center and Harvard Medical School in Massachusetts and colleagues, who looked at nearly 7,000 breast cancer patients between 1990 and 1999. The group was followed through 2007." Sounds pretty solid to me. We have the data for the number of women who are cured. You don't need to guesstimate or assume. We know the answer to that. I know - I'm the one citing a good study - thats where the 56% and 5% numbers came from. They're not guestimates or made up or assumptions. "In the Breast Care Center last year, Roux said, a quarter of the diagnosed breast cancer cases were in women in their early 40s." Not 15%. Brumar, my numbers come from the National Cancer Institute. They are the official data for the entire country. The numbers you quoted are from some woman's local clinic. Sheesh! I only cited Roux as she was cited in the report on the study by the Harvard Medical school researcher. Where have you linked to the National Cancer Insitute on this thread? My search doesn't show it.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next