kallend 1,678 #176 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. Nope, you simply misunderstood what you were posting. If YOU had a clue you'd know why. WHat you posted actually hurt your hypothesis but your analytical ability is too poor to see that. Funny, I recall you being ALL OVER those numbers as proof that medicare was better... until I showed where the crossover was well before medicare kicked in. Now it's suddenly not proof at all. Amazing how that works. Sounds more like you're covering your ass after the fact. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. . I already did. You just ignored it. The data you posted proved you wrong. You just misanalyzed it. Go and actually THINK about the data you posted. (I know it will be hard, given that you admitted some time ago that you know nothing of statistics). The crossover point is just where it should be, because the life expectancy is a convolution of inputs. Google "mathematical convolution" and learn something. Keep on misusing words and data, it's par for the course with you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #177 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. Nope, you simply misunderstood what you were posting. If YOU had a clue you'd know why. WHat you posted actually hurt your hypothesis but your analytical ability is too poor to see that. Funny, I recall you being ALL OVER those numbers as proof that medicare was better... until I showed where the crossover was well before medicare kicked in. Now it's suddenly not proof at all. Amazing how that works. Sounds more like you're covering your ass after the fact. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. . I already did. You just ignored it. The data you posted proved you wrong. You just misanalyzed it. Go and actually THINK about the data you posted. (I know it will be hard, given that you admitted some time ago that you know nothing of statistics). The crossover point is just where it should be, because the life expectancy is a convolution of inputs. Google "mathematical convolution" and learn something. Keep on misusing words and data, it's par for the course with you. More character assassination from the perfesser of ego - what a surprise. Only in YOUR mind could Americans having a longer life expectancy from age 55 onward than their UK counterpart be an indictment of the American healthcare system.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,678 #178 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. Nope, you simply misunderstood what you were posting. If YOU had a clue you'd know why. WHat you posted actually hurt your hypothesis but your analytical ability is too poor to see that. Funny, I recall you being ALL OVER those numbers as proof that medicare was better... until I showed where the crossover was well before medicare kicked in. Now it's suddenly not proof at all. Amazing how that works. Sounds more like you're covering your ass after the fact. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. . I already did. You just ignored it. The data you posted proved you wrong. You just misanalyzed it. Go and actually THINK about the data you posted. (I know it will be hard, given that you admitted some time ago that you know nothing of statistics). The crossover point is just where it should be, because the life expectancy is a convolution of inputs. Google "mathematical convolution" and learn something. Keep on misusing words and data, it's par for the course with you. More character assassination from the perfesser of ego - what a surprise. Only in YOUR mind could Americans having a longer life expectancy from age 55 onward than their UK counterpart be an indictment of the American healthcare system. Nope. By 55 Americans expect only 10 more years of an inferior system to suffer under, and 14.7 of universal HEALTH care. Hence even by age 55, 60% of their remaining years can be expected to be under a universal HEALTH care system By age 60, on average 76% of their remaining years will be under a universal HEALTH care system. As they get older the % of remaining life under universal HEALTHcare increases steadily. Hence their health benefit of Medicare doesn't make a sudden jump at age 65, the benefit of the universal system starts earlier.If you thought instead of posting drivel, you could have figured that out for yourself. And "health" != "medical" still, regardless of your attempts to use them interchangeably.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #179 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. Nope, you simply misunderstood what you were posting. If YOU had a clue you'd know why. WHat you posted actually hurt your hypothesis but your analytical ability is too poor to see that. Funny, I recall you being ALL OVER those numbers as proof that medicare was better... until I showed where the crossover was well before medicare kicked in. Now it's suddenly not proof at all. Amazing how that works. Sounds more like you're covering your ass after the fact. Feel free to prove me wrong, though. . I already did. You just ignored it. The data you posted proved you wrong. You just misanalyzed it. Go and actually THINK about the data you posted. (I know it will be hard, given that you admitted some time ago that you know nothing of statistics). The crossover point is just where it should be, because the life expectancy is a convolution of inputs. Google "mathematical convolution" and learn something. Keep on misusing words and data, it's par for the course with you. More character assassination from the perfesser of ego - what a surprise. Only in YOUR mind could Americans having a longer life expectancy from age 55 onward than their UK counterpart be an indictment of the American healthcare system. Nope. By 55 Americans have only 10 more years of an inferior system to suffer under, and 10+ of universal health care. As they get older (and still under 65) the ratio of universal to inferior steadily increases. Hence their life expectancy doesn't make a sudden jump at age 65, the benefit of the universal system starts earlier. Or, the majority don't need much medical care until later in life and the greater quality of the American healthcare system starts to make itself felt to a greater and greater degree. Of course, that wouldn't be the ringing endorsement of socmed that you rely upon. Quote If you thought instead of posting drivel, you could have figured that out for yourself. And if you would argue from an honest standpoint and not make all the snide comments, you might get answers with more meat to them, instead of smartass replies. Like a discussion about how the higher accidental death rates and violent death rates for the US doubtless skew the numbers for life expectancy. Quote And "health" != "medical" still, regardless of your attempts to use them interchangeably. When you can prove that docs can MAKE their patients follow their advice, we'll discuss it. Until then, there's all kinds of news stories and medical studies about how Americans don't eat right and don't exercise enough in counter. Stats *still* show American medicine to be the highest quality.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,678 #180 December 12, 2009 Quote Stats *still* show American medicine to be the highest quality. You CONTINUE to confuse medicine with healthcare as you have done quite deliberately throughout this thread. They are NOT the same thing. The thread title is "To those who favor government HEALTH care:" The US has excellent medicine for those of us that can afford it, and a lousy healthcare system overall, as expressed in life expectancies and infant mortality rates. health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine health != medicine ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #181 December 12, 2009 QuoteYou CONTINUE to confuse medicine with healthcare. They are NOT the same thing. I never said they were. Are you planning to stop putting words in my mouth anytime soon? Edit to add - I don't care how many times you type it. Do you always throw tantrums like that when you don't get your way? QuoteThe US has excellent medicine and a lousy healthcare system overall, as expressed in life expectancies and infant mortality rates.. Overly simplified argument. There is no way to differentiate failures in treatment and lack of compliance with medical advice, which is NOT a failure of the healthcare system. There's also differences in how infant mortality is defined throughout the world which makes differences in rates between countries.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #182 December 12, 2009 Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. No, it showed exactly the opposite. You just interpreted it in a kinda funny way. Quote Then, you tried to spin a bullshit storm about advice - that one fails because doctors can't compel compliance with the advice. I wonder what kind of treatment would you use to promote "healthy lifestyle"? Quote So - come up with some PROOF, or man up enough to admit you were spinning bullshit. LOL.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #183 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote You tried to tie socmed to life expectancy - cdc showed that one false. No, it showed exactly the opposite. You just interpreted it in a kinda funny way. Quote Then, you tried to spin a bullshit storm about advice - that one fails because doctors can't compel compliance with the advice. I wonder what kind of treatment would you use to promote "healthy lifestyle"? Quote So - come up with some PROOF, or man up enough to admit you were spinning bullshit. LOL. DUUUUDE he is a TEXICAN.... they always think they are experts on all shit Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #184 December 12, 2009 QuoteI wonder what kind of treatment would you use to promote "healthy lifestyle"? I wonder how patient noncompliance is the fault of the doctor? Maybe you can answer, because kallend can't seem to.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #185 December 12, 2009 QuoteI wonder how patient noncompliance is the fault of the doctor? Maybe you can answer, because kallend can't seem to. Some can be - for example, the doctor might prescript procedures or drugs which are difficult to perform (like injections) or too expensive for a patient, the patient informed the doctor about difficulties, and other treatment options with similar effectiveness were available but the doctor somehow ignored them. As for lifestyle choices, telling a fat ass that he or she should exercise more and eat less crappy foods sounds quite naive too, as every of them knows, or at least should have known that. This is kind of advice you don't need a doctor to tell you.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #186 December 12, 2009 Quote Can't compel anything at all, can they? It's not the USSR, you aren't forced to take meds or have surgery. That argument doesn't fly. Even in USSR you didn't have to, unless you had an STD or TB. Mandatory treatment for those was required by law, and non-compliance led to hospical anyway, but in jail. I believe treatment for things like syphilis is still mandatory in Russia, and people work it around by getting anonymous STD tests. But for everything else treatment was not required. Indeed you might have had to sign a paper telling you that your doctor prescribed hospitalization, you refused and you accepted all responsibility for that, and you were free to go. Sorry for side-track :)* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #187 December 12, 2009 QuoteQuoteI wonder how patient noncompliance is the fault of the doctor? Maybe you can answer, because kallend can't seem to. Some can be - for example, the doctor might prescript procedures or drugs which are difficult to perform (like injections) or too expensive for a patient, the patient informed the doctor about difficulties, and other treatment options with similar effectiveness were available but the doctor somehow ignored them. As for lifestyle choices, telling a fat ass that he or she should exercise more and eat less crappy foods sounds quite naive too, as every of them knows, or at least should have known that. This is kind of advice you don't need a doctor to tell you. Your first example is good - I think that *could* be laid at the feet of the medical establishment, but it would be VERY dependent upon the circumstances. The second example is, of course, self-evident (at least to you and I). Thanks for the honest response.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #188 December 12, 2009 Quote Your first example is good - I think that *could* be laid at the feet of the medical establishment, but it would be VERY dependent upon the circumstances. There are more similar cases - for example a doctor prescribed a drug which had bad side effects on a patient. The patient goes to the doctor next day, and tells him about that. The doctor prescribes another drug, and forgets to tell the patient that the first drug should be abandoned. Patient assumes that the second drug is prescribed to reduce the effect of the first drug (this indeed happens in medicine), takes both, experiences much worse side effects, and then flushes the drugs down the toilet. Assuming that the third drug would be even worse, he doesn't go to the doctor anymore. I've heard about the case in Russia when a doctor prescribed a combination of drugs, which all must be taken regularly at very specific intervals to avoid some crappy side effects, to a patient who was receiving treatment for memory lapses.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #189 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Can't compel anything at all, can they? It's not the USSR, you aren't forced to take meds or have surgery. That argument doesn't fly. Even in USSR you didn't have to, unless you had an STD or TB. Mandatory treatment for those was required by law, and non-compliance led to hospical anyway, but in jail. I believe treatment for things like syphilis is still mandatory in Russia, and people work it around by getting anonymous STD tests. But for everything else treatment was not required. Indeed you might have had to sign a paper telling you that your doctor prescribed hospitalization, you refused and you accepted all responsibility for that, and you were free to go. Sorry for side-track :) Wow that would be REALLLY harsh on the red bible belt states... Quote Syphilis is a localised infection, with 72.4% of counties reporting no cases at all in 2007. The disease remains a problem in the South (48.8% of all syphilis cases in 2007) Must be a family values thing.http://www.avert.org/stdstatisticusa.htm Top ten states ranked by rate (per 100,000) of reported STD cases: United States, 2007 Rank Primary and secondary syphilis Chlamydia Gonnorhea 1 Louisiana (12.4) Mississippi (745.1) Mississippi (285.7) 2 Alabama (8.3) Alaska (732.9) Louisiana (259.7) 3 Georgia (7.3) South Carolina (611.7) South Carolina (239.0) 4 Maryland (6.1) Alabama (546.9) Alabama (236.7) 5 Tennessee (6.1) New Mexico (484) Georgia (190.5) 6 California (5.6) Georgia (458.3) North Carolina (188.2) 7 Texas (4.7) Louisiana (451.6) Delaware (176.0) 8 Florida (5) Tennessee (444.9) Missouri (169) 9 Texas (4.9) Hawaii (440.2) Illinois (162.2) 10 Arizona (4.8) Illinois (432.3) Tennessee (158.4) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #190 December 12, 2009 Quote Wow that would be REALLLY harsh on the red bible belt states...Top ten states ranked by rate (per 100,000) of reported STD cases: United States, 2007 Rank Primary and secondary syphilis Chlamydia Gonnorhea 1 Louisiana (12.4) Mississippi (745.1) Mississippi (285.7) 2 Alabama (8.3) Alaska (732.9) Louisiana (259.7) 3 Georgia (7.3) South Carolina (611.7) South Carolina (239.0) 4 Maryland (6.1) Alabama (546.9) Alabama (236.7) 5 Tennessee (6.1) New Mexico (484) Georgia (190.5) 6 California (5.6) Georgia (458.3) North Carolina (188.2) 7 Texas (4.7) Louisiana (451.6) Delaware (176.0) 8 Florida (5) Tennessee (444.9) Missouri (169) 9 Texas (4.9) Hawaii (440.2) Illinois (162.2) 10 Arizona (4.8) Illinois (432.3) Tennessee (158.4) Wow! And I thought why do they all oppose government involvement in healthcare??? Now I got it: it is "Don't you dare touch my syphilis! I am a free person, and I will decide myself whether to treat it, or share it with other people - and no fucking government should decide for me!"* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,678 #191 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote You CONTINUE to confuse medicine with healthcare. They are NOT the same thing. I never said they were. Are you planning to stop putting words in my mouth anytime soon? Irony score off the scale. Who was it that kept replacing "Health" with "medicine" in this thread (posts #127, 161, 175, 179), despite repeatedly being told they were not the same thing? Including in the snipped out portions of the post you just replied to. Oh, it was YOU. Quote Quote The US has excellent medicine and a lousy healthcare system overall, as expressed in life expectancies and infant mortality rates.. Overly simplified argument. There is no way to differentiate failures in treatment and lack of compliance with medical advice, which is NOT a failure of the healthcare system. . Please present your PROOF that noncompliance is higher in the USA. But thanks for the very nice data that showed how, as the expected % of non-universal healthcare coverage in Americans' remaining life decreases in the USA, so their life expectancy compared to another nation (of YOUR choosing) improves. It was cool of you to present data that contradicts your own assertions (even if you didn't know you were doing it).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,678 #192 December 12, 2009 Quote Quote Wow that would be REALLLY harsh on the red bible belt states...Top ten states ranked by rate (per 100,000) of reported STD cases: United States, 2007 Rank Primary and secondary syphilis Chlamydia Gonnorhea 1 Louisiana (12.4) Mississippi (745.1) Mississippi (285.7) 2 Alabama (8.3) Alaska (732.9) Louisiana (259.7) 3 Georgia (7.3) South Carolina (611.7) South Carolina (239.0) 4 Maryland (6.1) Alabama (546.9) Alabama (236.7) 5 Tennessee (6.1) New Mexico (484) Georgia (190.5) 6 California (5.6) Georgia (458.3) North Carolina (188.2) 7 Texas (4.7) Louisiana (451.6) Delaware (176.0) 8 Florida (5) Tennessee (444.9) Missouri (169) 9 Texas (4.9) Hawaii (440.2) Illinois (162.2) 10 Arizona (4.8) Illinois (432.3) Tennessee (158.4) Wow! And I thought why do they all oppose government involvement in healthcare??? It follows, since one symptom of syphilis is dementia.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #193 December 12, 2009 QuoteIt would be nice to know what number this 3.4% corresponds to. What it is is a smaller than normal return for most businesses. DZ's do better and we joke about how little money they make."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #194 December 12, 2009 QuoteBut you have USPS which is a "government option", and which works very well. From the other side, you have Enron, AIG, GM and a bunch of other superior private companies, which are not. And a large difference between them is that one should be allowed to go under (even if the Govt does not let them, they should go under) and the other will never go under no matter how badly they are run. So what you seem to support is a GOVERNMENT program that no matter how badly it is run will never be held accountable for its performance, yet you bitch about private company's that run the exact same way."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #195 December 12, 2009 QuoteThe same, accurate, point has been made dozens of times already. You might as well be talking to a brick wall. If they are ALREADY getting HC now.... Why is giving them HC going to cost another 1T?????"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #196 December 12, 2009 QuoteNot my fault if you can't differentiate between HEALTH and medicine. Actually, WE can. Like when you throw the emotional argument out that some other Country's have longer life expectancies.... Then when we claim it is do to life style choices (over all health), we just trashed your claim.... But you continue to make the incorrect comparison that Govt HC leads to longer life spans."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #197 December 12, 2009 QuoteQuoteNot my fault if you can't differentiate between HEALTH and medicine. Actually, WE can. Like when you throw the emotional argument out that some other Country's have longer life expectancies.... Then when we claim it is do to life style choices (over all health), we just trashed your claim.... But you continue to make the incorrect comparison that Govt HC leads to longer life spans. What do you think the life span of the elderly in this country would be without medicare? Most of the retirees I see can barely pay for food and housing let alone any luxuries. I guess that is ok though.. isn't it usually you conservatives who even want to cut spending by going after their social security and medicare first?? All those entitlement programs seem to get trumped by the conservative love of war and the military industustrial complex to spend our tax money on rather than our own people. To me that is shameful for a supposedly christian country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #198 December 12, 2009 Try asking again without the lame personal jabs."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #199 December 12, 2009 QuoteTry asking again without the lame personal jabs. What for.. you cant answer it anyway with your lame personal assertions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #200 December 12, 2009 Quote What for.. you cant answer it anyway with your lame personal assertions. Got it... you admit you can't act like an adult."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
