Some international statistics to check .......
Dec 23rd, 2003, 10:44 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some international statistics to check .......
Hi
Here is a link to statistics by country :
http://web.hhs.se/personal/suzuki/
You can use it to "prove" lots of interesting theories. So how about
smokers live longer ?
Life expectancy USA = 77.4, France = 79.05, Greece = 78.74, Japan =
80.91
% daily smokers USA = 19%, France = 27%, Greece = 37%, Japan = 34%
Have fun
Peter
The Languedoc Page
http://tlp.netfirms.com
Here is a link to statistics by country :
http://web.hhs.se/personal/suzuki/
You can use it to "prove" lots of interesting theories. So how about
smokers live longer ?
Life expectancy USA = 77.4, France = 79.05, Greece = 78.74, Japan =
80.91
% daily smokers USA = 19%, France = 27%, Greece = 37%, Japan = 34%
Have fun
Peter
The Languedoc Page
http://tlp.netfirms.com
Dec 23rd, 2003, 10:57 AM
#5
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These statistics do NOT compare smokers and nonsmokers, but only compare nationalities. Not all people in the USA are nonsmokers and not all French people are smokers. Plus, there are many causes of death in the world, not just smoking-related deaths. To compare life expectancy of smokers and nonsmokers, you look only at those groups, controlled for other variables.
Suggest you read the classic book "How to Lie with Statistics."
Suggest you read the classic book "How to Lie with Statistics."
Dec 23rd, 2003, 12:07 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Diet may be correlated with longer life as is/are quality of health care and prevention efforts, safety issues (not being shot at), and so forth. There are many independent and uncontrolled variables to consider besides diet. But as someone above has stated, correlation does not equal causation. However, lies or not, it would appear from some of the above posts that people believe these figures explain just about everything.
Dec 23rd, 2003, 12:27 PM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure I believe that "diet" plays a pretty good role in these theories but "as another poster said" we shouldn't be taking this too seriously - possibilly holds a clue too. Americans allow too much "STRESS" to take over their lives and that becomes their lifestyle. I believe that most Europeans holiday often ( up to 6 weeks) throughout the year whereas most Americans take 1 or 2 weeks a year.
Dec 23rd, 2003, 12:32 PM
#12
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you wouldn't stick your head underwater and breathe in, so why would you inhale smoke into your lungs? if you can physically force your body to do something so against its nature what other lies are you telling yourself - smokers live in a cloud of denial
Dec 23rd, 2003, 12:48 PM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole correlation/causation thing just drives me crazy in health policy.
In this week's TIME (or maybe it's Newsweek) there's a letter that points out that breastfed babies are less likely to be overweight as children, compared to bottle-fed. The writer leaps to the conclusion that BF somehow magically "immunizes" kids against overweight.
They seem to have forgotten that higher BF rates also correlate to higher-income households, where overweight is lower . . . or perhaps moms who BF are more likely to watch their kids' diets carefully . . . or a hundred other complicated possibilities. Arrgh.
Both within the US and internationally, infant mortality rates are higher among children with dark skin. So does that mean that dark skin is somehow intrinsically less healthy?! No, of course not, it's a very complicated sequence of causes and effects, most of which are economic.
Sorry, end of rant, I've just seen this sort of thinking lead to a lot of foolish guidelines that in turn lead to widespread skepticism about public-health policy.
In this week's TIME (or maybe it's Newsweek) there's a letter that points out that breastfed babies are less likely to be overweight as children, compared to bottle-fed. The writer leaps to the conclusion that BF somehow magically "immunizes" kids against overweight.
They seem to have forgotten that higher BF rates also correlate to higher-income households, where overweight is lower . . . or perhaps moms who BF are more likely to watch their kids' diets carefully . . . or a hundred other complicated possibilities. Arrgh.
Both within the US and internationally, infant mortality rates are higher among children with dark skin. So does that mean that dark skin is somehow intrinsically less healthy?! No, of course not, it's a very complicated sequence of causes and effects, most of which are economic.
Sorry, end of rant, I've just seen this sort of thinking lead to a lot of foolish guidelines that in turn lead to widespread skepticism about public-health policy.
Dec 23rd, 2003, 03:23 PM
#15
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard that 68% of statistics are just made up on the spot.
SalB - It is a joke, but in addition it's known to logicians as the fallacy of the undistributed middle. Here's another syllogism with the same fallacy:
All cats are animals
All dogs are animals
(Therefore) All cats are dogs.
SalB - It is a joke, but in addition it's known to logicians as the fallacy of the undistributed middle. Here's another syllogism with the same fallacy:
All cats are animals
All dogs are animals
(Therefore) All cats are dogs.
Dec 23rd, 2003, 04:47 PM
#16
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I'll bite: Hmmmn, "% daily smokers...."
It proves that Greece has the biggest cigarettes, since smoking one takes 37% of a Greek's day, whereas it takes but 19% of an American's day....
Then again maybe it proves that the cigarettes in all four nations take the same absolute amount of time to smoke, but that for a Greek, this amount of time comprises a greater relative percentage of the day. This quite clearly shows that Grecian days are shorter, and by logical deduction we can thus infer that Greece revolves the fastest around the sun, followed by (in order) Japan, France, and the US....
It proves that Greece has the biggest cigarettes, since smoking one takes 37% of a Greek's day, whereas it takes but 19% of an American's day....
Then again maybe it proves that the cigarettes in all four nations take the same absolute amount of time to smoke, but that for a Greek, this amount of time comprises a greater relative percentage of the day. This quite clearly shows that Grecian days are shorter, and by logical deduction we can thus infer that Greece revolves the fastest around the sun, followed by (in order) Japan, France, and the US....
Dec 24th, 2003, 04:52 AM
#19
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great Theme! A problem using 'gross statistics' arises as we try to apply them personally. I have a matrix of 10,000 humans. I can know that 1 of them will die today but I can't know who. Life statistics for the USA usually credit women with a 10 year lifespan advantage. Another study found that people who ate breakfast lived longest. Another (surprizing for me) major cause of female deaths in the 25 to 35 year range. Suicide. How many were smokers? The Atlanta Center for Disease Control used to publish death statistics for blacks and whites, men and women and in five year age blocks.
Using these figures it would be possible to learn of some personal hazards and then allow an attempt to avoid them. Question? If I move to France will I live two more years?
Using these figures it would be possible to learn of some personal hazards and then allow an attempt to avoid them. Question? If I move to France will I live two more years?
