Cramerica Industries
Clayton Cramer (misfires a lot, looks like Michael Fumento with the beard but without the intellectual integrity) writes:
I mentioned a couple of days ago a study that claimed that Americans were much less healthy than Britons, in spite of Americans spending about twice as much per capita on health care. That article claimed that cancer rates among white, non-Hispanic Americans 55-64 were almost twice that of Britons the same age–9.5% vs. 5.5%.
One of my careful readers found that very hard to believe–and points to a study of cancer mortality rates by nation published in one of the American Cancer Society’s journals showing that Americans had actually slightly lower cancer mortality rates than Britons as of 2002[.] […]
Now, we aren’t comparing apples to apples here. These rates are for all ages, and reflect death rates, not cancer rates–but it is hard to believe that Americans could have even close to twice the cancer rate of Britons, and yet a lower death rate. That means American health care is roughly twice as good as curing cancer, or that there is something bizarrel skewed about cancer mortality in Americans ages 55-64.
Or, it means that Cramer and one of his “careful readers” are “bizarrel” full of the shit:
Cancer occurs predominantly in older people, with 64% of cases diagnosed in people aged 65 and over[.]
We give Clayton the last word:
As my astute reader observed: “I’m certain there are serious problems with this study, and we will hear about them in the next few weeks.” Yeah, I’m certain, too.
Stoopid Brits thinking they’re so cool.
I saw 1 comment listed on the front page for this, and was like, “It’s gonna start ‘In fact…’, ‘cos it’s Gary. But, surprise, it’s annie! Who’da thunk it?
-mainly because his cancerous tumor is his best friend! He calls it Edwin the Lump. It calls him “Shitbreath.” It’s hilarious to watch them bicker! It keeps unfastening his colostomy bag at the most embarrassing moments, like that time he had an audience with the Pope… They had to scrub the floors at St. Peter’s for hours to get rid of the stains and the smell!
The British smell like wet wool.
I would think that spending more on healthcare means you’re less healthy.
OHHHHHH let me have it, let me cryyyyyy, it’s only rain…oh let me have it let me cryyyyyy it’s only rain you know it’s me CATHYYYYYYYY@@@@@@@@@
Never even mind the age issue…
Isn’t cancer mortality rate the percentage of people who die as a result of their cancer?
The first data suggests that ~10 people out of 100 (in the target age group) in the U.S. get cancer, while 5 people out of 100 in Britain get cancer. If there is an identical cancer mortality rate of 20% in both countries, 2 Americans will die of cancer and 1 Brit will.
Obviously, the identical cancer mortality rate has nothing to do with comparative health. Well, you could argue that the cheaper British system is just as good as the American system at preventing death due to cancer (but I don’t think that was their point).
If there’s a flaw in the original article that showed double cancer rates in the U.S. it’s could be related to the more expensive & aggressive U.S. health care system diagnosing more cancers (leading to the apparently higher rate). Or it could be the sun causing skin cancer in the U.S. (there’s less sun in Britain and it’s a common cancer).
So, it’s hard to be sure the original point means a lot, but it’s easy to be sure the second point is irrelevant.
Anyone who gets his “facts” from Tim Lambert is nobody to be speaking of “intellectual integrity.” Actually, I still have a column and Tim Lambert still doesn’t. Nor do you. Have a nice day.
Anyone who gets his “facts” from Tim Lambert is nobody to be speaking of “intellectual integrity.”
LOL. Please get a few of your sockpuppets to come here and back you up, Fume.
Boy, he sure put us in our place. Nice content-free post, Fume.
If the more expensive US system were indeed diagnosing cancer earlier, then I would expect that we’d see a significant difference in the overall mortality rate.
Could it be that the British have more preventative health care and therefore less cancer among the 55-64 year olds?
Yep, you would expect better disease prevention with universal health care.
(Excellent choice of handle, BTW; I LOVE the Dirk Gently books!)
Could it be that the British have more preventative health care and therefore less cancer among the 55-64 year olds?
nonsense! they must be true believers in our lord and savioUr Jebus!
nothing else can explain(apart from the fact that they don’t have high-fructose corn syrup and assorted absolute shite in their diets in general) their general good health
also, higher usage of the vowel U is supposed to be anti-carcinogenic.
god bless the queen;s english!
Sis says that it looks like Mike has one of his sockpuppets stuffed in his Speedo.