Comments on: COMMONWEALTH FUND + W.H.O. DATA = BS http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/ Cleaning the Augean Stables of the Health Care Debate Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:04:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Marc Brown http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-17415 Marc Brown Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:34:04 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-17415 Have you had a chance to come up with some figures that would materialise under your reforms? 'And another point for you. Have a look at this story - what with your reforms would you envisage thisi person paying in terms of a premium and deductible? http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20080108_Self-employed__and_going_it_alone_.html' Have you had a chance to come up with some figures that would materialise under your reforms?

‘And another point for you. Have a look at this story - what with your reforms would you envisage thisi person paying in terms of a premium and deductible?
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20080108_Self-employed__and_going_it_alone_.html‘

]]> By: Marc Brown http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-16160 Marc Brown Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:45:13 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-16160 What I don't understand is why you would think the US should come out better, as you have the most inequality of any developed nation. And if you actually read the study you'll see they have been careful in selection: ...for this paper we considered conditions such as bacterial infections, treatable cancers, diabetes, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease, and complications of common surgical procedures. We also included ischemic heart disease (IHD); however, in line with accumulating evidence suggesting that only up to half of premature mortality from IHD may be potentially amenable to health care, we here considered only half of IHD deaths to be “amenable.” A general age limit was set at seventy-five years, because the extent to which deaths can be prevented by health care and the reliability of death certification become increasingly questionable at older ages.' And another point for you. Have a look at this story - what with your reforms would you envisage thisi person paying in terms of a premium and deductible? http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20080108_Self-employed__and_going_it_alone_.html What I don’t understand is why you would think the US should come out better, as you have the most inequality of any developed nation. And if you actually read the study you’ll see they have been careful in selection:

…for this paper we considered conditions such as bacterial infections, treatable cancers, diabetes, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease, and complications of common surgical procedures. We also included ischemic heart disease (IHD); however, in line with accumulating evidence suggesting that only up to half of premature mortality from IHD may be potentially amenable to health care, we here considered only half of IHD deaths to be “amenable.” A general age limit was set at seventy-five years, because the extent to which deaths can be prevented by health care and the reliability of death certification become increasingly questionable at older ages.’

And another point for you. Have a look at this story - what with your reforms would you envisage thisi person paying in terms of a premium and deductible?

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20080108_Self-employed__and_going_it_alone_.html

]]> By: drmatt http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-16146 drmatt Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:00:55 +0000 http://www.healthcarebs.com/2008/01/10/commonwealth-fund-who-data-bs/#comment-16146 No such thing as perfect numbers, all studies have variables as you aptly discuss. However, you failed to discuss statistical significance. The greater the number and effect of variables the harder it is to reach statistical significance. If you understand the concept you can apply it, i.e. the UK, the US, and Canada have very similar reporting methods and consistency but the numbers are so close I would say they are not statistically significant. However, if you review the counterpart to health and human services department in France and judge how they report you will see they are not that much different, makeing those numbers statistically significant. I suppose if you dont have more than a basic understanding of statistics you should neither use this info to suppor nor debase an arguement. Oh and we should all remember that cause of death on dealth certificates has been shown to be 90% inaccurate (we dont usually autopsy). No such thing as perfect numbers, all studies have variables as you aptly discuss. However, you failed to discuss statistical significance. The greater the number and effect of variables the harder it is to reach statistical significance. If you understand the concept you can apply it, i.e. the UK, the US, and Canada have very similar reporting methods and consistency but the numbers are so close I would say they are not statistically significant. However, if you review the counterpart to health and human services department in France and judge how they report you will see they are not that much different, makeing those numbers statistically significant. I suppose if you dont have more than a basic understanding of statistics you should neither use this info to suppor nor debase an arguement. Oh and we should all remember that cause of death on dealth certificates has been shown to be 90% inaccurate (we dont usually autopsy).

]]>