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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (349081)	8/30/2007 12:09:41 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573857

"You've guessed, you haven't really collected and run the data, or at least if you have you haven't posted the analysis." That is true. However, I have linked to enough data to show that the post you've posted is more than a little whacked. I can't prove it because I haven't run across the accidental death data. But, based on what I have tracked down, the US would have to have a significantly higher accidental death rate to reach the conclusion of that post. Given that is unlikely to be the case, well... "Suicide is higher in some countries besides the US, and its lower in others" And in all the countries with a higher life expectancy, their suicide rate is higher than in the US. Often significantly so. In almost every case, the difference in homicide is more than made up in the higher suicide rate. "Pointing out some high countries doesn't amount for adjusting for that factor, let alone adjusting for all the others." If it more than makes up for the higher homicide rate in the US, it sure does. "Accidents are a major cause of death and you haven't provided any adjustment for that" I haven't found the data. I have a lot of reasons to suspect it isn't all that much higher than other countries. And quite possibly would be lower when you count all accidental deaths. "People in the US tend to drive more than people in most other countries. " And they have more pedestrians, motorcyclists and bicyclists. The point you are trying to make is...? "Double in Japan, and maybe in one or two other small countries, your cherry picking your data. " All of which have a higher life expectancy than the US. If you look at the ones with a higher suicide rate, many of them are on the list of having a higher life expectancy. "You haven't even shown that the average suicide rate in other developed countries is higher that in the US, let alone double the rate." Yawn. Straw man. I never made the claim that all developed countries had double the suicide rate. I did make the claim that many of the countries with a higher life expectancy also have a higher suicide rate. Sometimes as much as twice the US average. Try making honest arguments, Tim. "And to the extent that your contention that our medical system is better at treating the complications from it is true, that is a point in favor of our medical system." True. Never claimed differently. You do realize that this doesn't help your argument at all? And, in fact, hurts it? That is the problem with nitpicking for nitpicking sake. You can undermine your own points. "It doesn't mean you can drop adjustment for obesity, it would mean that we have more difficulty because of it, but than we overcome it with better treatment." Show me the figures for excess mortality due to obesity for the US and other countries. Then it can be quantified. However, you are pretty obviously grasping at straws here. Like with the accidental deaths figures. On the things with readily available data, your thesis is clearly trashed. So you are left with the things where the data isn't readily available. So you are claiming that the data which can't be found proves your theory. And that isn't an honest argument, Tim. While it can't be proven or disproven, there is no reason to suspect your thesis is correct. The accidental death data has only a chance of working in your favor if you only consider automobile deaths. And that isn't a given because, historically, the US has had a much lower traffic mortality rate than other countries. Things could have changed in the past couple of decades, but it would be irrational to expect that it is greatly different than historical patterns. And then when you add in mortality of pedestrians, motorcyclists and bicyclists, it almost certainly isn't significantly higher. Now, it might be the case that excess deaths due to obesity is higher than the rest of the world. Without the data, you cannot say that by subtracting those cases that the US life expectancy would shoot to the top. Now, there is a way to get the US life expectancy to be the highest in the world. Just drop off all of those with a family income of less than about $60k a year. But I don't see where that helps your argument much...