Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Webster Groves who wrote (18336)	3/20/2007 6:58:44 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

how many crack babies do those countries have ??

To: Webster Groves who wrote (18336)	3/20/2007 7:30:44 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

Are you a lawyer ? Rather than argue the issue, you want to argue the process. The issue is a statistical one. Correct process when dealing with statisics is vital, without it the statistics are close to meaningless. From my the link at one of my earlier posts - "...But infant mortality tells us a lot less about a health care system than one might think. The main problem is inconsistent measurement across nations. The United Nations Statistics Division, which collects data on infant mortality, stipulates that an infant, once it is removed from its mother and then "breathes or shows any other evidence of life such as beating of the heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles... is considered live-born regardless of gestational age."16 While the U.S. follows that definition, many other nations do not." nationalcenter.org I'm not sure that Canada does have identical guidelines. I'm not talking about North Korea, most rich developed countries will not report severly premature babies as part of the infant mortality rate. Perhaps Canada joins the US in being an exception. It wouldn't be a shock that North America would be different then most of Europe or Japan. Even in Canada their are differences as the links I posted point out. Perhaps they are not as severe as the differences between the US and Europe, but I'm not sure they would qualify as "essentially identical". So we have a long way to go to determine if the guidelines are essentially identical. If they are you still have to consider the fact that the difference in the statistics has other causes beside the quality of health care and the access to quality health care. Controlling for those factors is very difficult, but perhaps you could at least attempt it. Then we finally have comparable figures. PS - I DEMAND that you reply to my message. That's rather rude (and entirely unnecessary)