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 : A US National Health Care System?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (14178)3/9/2010 12:37:00 PM
From: Alighieri1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) of 42652
 
Now they're claiming cause.

No they are not. They are publishing data both ways and in both cases the higher risk is significant.

In the model adjusted only for age and
gender, lack of health insurance was significantly
associated with mortality (hazard ratio
[HR]=1.80; 95% CI=1.44, 2.26). In subsequent
models adjusted for gender, age, race/
ethnicity, poverty income ratio, education,
unemployment, smoking, regular alcohol use,
self-rated health, physician-rated health, and
BMI, lack of health insurance significantly
increased the risk of mortality (HR=1.40;
95%CI=1.06,1.84; Table 2). We detected no
significant interactions between lack of health
insurance and any other variables. Our sensitivity
analyses yielded substantially similar
estimates.

Replicating the methods of the IOM panel
with updated census data24,25 and this hazard
ratio, we calculated 27424 deaths among
Americans aged 25 to 64 years in 2000
associated with lack of health insurance. Applying
this hazard ratio to census data from
200526 and including all persons aged 18 to 64
years yields an estimated 35327 deaths annually
among the nonelderly associated with lack
of health insurance. When we repeated this
approach without age stratification, (thought by
investigators at the Urban Institute to be an
overly conservative approach)23 we calculated
approximately 44789 deaths among Americans
aged 18 to 64 years in 2005 associated with
lack of health insurance.


Sure, there are probably some people who would have lived longer had they had insurance. But how many, we don't know. How much longer, we don't know. Pretending we do is bogus.

At the time of the interview, these people had no insurance, and during the following 12 years they died at a statistically significant greater rate, after all possible demographic adjustments were made to the data to make sure it was as unbiased as possible.

What's not clear about that?

I have no basis to disallow the study, you seem to think you do. To me the results AND the logic of someone without insurance having a greater chance of dying early is intuitively clear.

Al
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext