The Soapbox

southdenverhoo

Joined: 10/11/2001 Posts: 13218
Likes: 17767

What's this?

Frankly difference between a 62% 5 year survival rate and a 57% one for


some cancer that hits less than 1% of the adult population is much less important, IMO, in ranking health care systems among developed countries, than is the nuts and bolts stuff that affects everybody, that the film crew was quizzing Brits on in the clip.

I mean, I would probably feel much different if someone I knew had a multiple myeloma diagnosis. Well, that's not true, somebody I know does have a multiple myeloma diagnosis, and the fact that he might live two or three years longer here than in the UK doesn't make our system better or worse than theirs.

It doesn't shed much light on the question either way IMO.

Not to mention that, if I understood the posts correctly, your data is from 2002? But then you're going with "well, it's widely accepted..."?

(In response to this post by BocaHoo91)

Posted: 12/03/2019 at 9:36PM


+6

Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:


Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:


75
Hide This

Current Thread:
 
  Brits on the street attempt to guess medical costs in the US(link) -- hooshouse 12/03/2019 6:55PM
  Perhaps you get what you pay for, and free isn't -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 7:35PM
  It is not that good, but it is on the upper half on more than half of the -- JohnHoo2 12/04/2019 12:28AM
  Yeah, but when you have 50-63 countries -- BocaHoo91 12/04/2019 06:40AM
  Chart is rather incomplete without a column for US healthcare -- Quaker 12/03/2019 7:57PM
  He thinks he's so smart with his "data" and "facts"!!! Just watch Sicko!!! ** -- ResistHoo 12/03/2019 8:52PM
  Or here's one with more types of cancers plus all malignancies -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 8:17PM
  2002 though; the current data seems password protected -- Quaker 12/03/2019 8:44PM
  Yeah, I noticed the date after posting. But I think it's pretty commonly -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 9:22PM
  Frankly difference between a 62% 5 year survival rate and a 57% one for -- southdenverhoo 12/03/2019 9:36PM
  IMO survival is a very poor benchmark and % is not the right metric. -- 81_Hokie 12/04/2019 08:41AM
  Right, supported with a linked article from 2018. ** -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 9:40PM
  Why is 5 year survival percentage a thing? I've never understood that. ** -- southdenverhoo 12/03/2019 10:38PM
  I mean, for example, this: -- southdenverhoo 12/03/2019 11:02PM
  I think you could make your last argument for Germany, France, Norway, etc -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 11:33PM
  Tv ** -- southdenverhoo 12/04/2019 08:16AM
  Tv ** -- southdenverhoo 12/04/2019 08:16AM
  Man. I could make a very long post. -- Shenhoo 12/03/2019 10:54PM
  What are your odds of surviving 5 years with cancer? -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 10:52PM
  People that die in 7 years are called "survivors" in this rubric. They -- southdenverhoo 12/03/2019 11:03PM
  It’s almost like someone went and cherry picked a stat where the US looks -- WahooRQ 12/04/2019 07:15AM
  We are as good or better then -- BocaHoo91 12/04/2019 08:34AM
  I'd rather live another 7 than 5. But that's just me. -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 11:29PM
  That’s certainly possible. Are you cognizant of -- southdenverhoo 12/04/2019 08:27AM
  Well that, and basic common sense -- BocaHoo91 12/04/2019 08:37AM
  How's this? -- BocaHoo91 12/03/2019 8:14PM

Notice: Trying to get property 'queue' of non-object in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781
vm307