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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (11956)	11/28/2009 12:16:17 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Talk about willful ignorance. It may not be accurate but at least it was a thoughtful attempt. In contrast to the author's illogic and hyperbole, I tried to figure what percent of the actual difference between breast cancer survival rates in the US vs Europe might be attributable to the improved survival of American forty somethings due to screenings. The author, OTOH, cavalierly attributed all of it. She ignored the effect of the difference in populations--all the breast cancers deaths and survivors over the age of 50. She ignored differences in treatments received. She ignored the "fact" that the "US has the best health care in the world." <g> She ignored lumps found by women, themselves. And not only did she attribute the entire difference to mammograms for forty somethings, she had the audacity to double it. That's not apples and oranges. That's apples and elephants, maybe even apples and aircraft carriers. And even after I carefully explained how that isn't valid, you still believe it? What positive label to you think that deserves? Definitely not "apt." "Loyal to a fault," perhaps. LOL. According to her, if we cease screening mammograms for most women under 50, the US breast cancer survival rate will drop 11 percent. Yeah, right...