tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8792796175181373862024-03-12T23:22:28.395-04:00Data Driven DecisionsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-50211961901938823562011-02-24T23:01:00.008-05:002011-02-24T23:29:08.750-05:00Is the US an extreme outlier in Healthcare per Capita?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iM_MgB4kZ04/TWcsZ8FOoGI/AAAAAAAAAUw/gkm4SVMRJLM/s1600/HealthperGDP_linearexp2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 165px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iM_MgB4kZ04/TWcsZ8FOoGI/AAAAAAAAAUw/gkm4SVMRJLM/s400/HealthperGDP_linearexp2.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5577475487658057826" /></a><br /><br />Data from OECD, 2007, Health at a Glance 2007; OECD Indicators<br /><br />For Further discussion see <a href="http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/sure-its-got-to-go-up-but-how-much/">this post on the Incidental Economist</a>, particularly the comment section.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-42013407862267483412010-05-03T11:06:00.001-04:002010-05-03T11:13:59.017-04:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/S97m4pY7IVI/AAAAAAAAATw/OoouKYABwWw/s1600/First-Draft.bmp"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 278px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/S97m4pY7IVI/AAAAAAAAATw/OoouKYABwWw/s400/First-Draft.bmp" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5467060858531815762" /></a><br /><a href="http://id.mattmelchiori.com/?p=103"><br />via</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-37322093437329682742009-11-10T11:04:00.009-05:002009-11-10T12:11:30.326-05:00Gay MarriageI don't know if there is any issue with such a generational divide...<br /><br /><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SvmQxaRMUEI/AAAAAAAAAQQ/wLlqvICSqDo/s1600-h/gaymarriage_age.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 388px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SvmQxaRMUEI/AAAAAAAAAQQ/wLlqvICSqDo/s400/gaymarriage_age.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5402508406547042370" /></a><br /><br /><br />It currently appears that it's only a matter time before legalization.<br /><br /><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SvmQ7RjZwnI/AAAAAAAAAQg/eadYUS28A-Q/s1600-h/gay3.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 346px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SvmQ7RjZwnI/AAAAAAAAAQg/eadYUS28A-Q/s400/gay3.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5402508576006193778" /></a><br /><br />Nate Silver projects when each state will legalize gay marriage via a regression model with the following variables:<br /><em>1. The year in which (a gay marriage type) amendment was voted upon;<br />2. The percentage of adults in 2008 Gallup tracking surveys who said that religion was an important part of their daily lives;<br />3. The percentage of white evangelicals in the state.</em><br /><br /><a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/will-iowans-uphold-gay-marriage.html">He projects about half of states will legalize by 2014 and the rest by 2024</a>. I personally think the status quo bias is a bit stronger than that and it'll take a little longer...<br /><br />*Edit - Nate Sliver actually projects "the dates when the model predicts that each of the 50 states would vote against a marriage ban." The dates seem a bit more resonable now, but i still would be more conservative in the projections. Though maybe we've hit a tipping point?<br /><strong></strong><strong></strong><strong></strong>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-3005752522334065212009-10-29T12:50:00.004-04:002009-10-29T12:59:01.881-04:00Childbirth and EvolutionFrom <a href="http://www.halftheskymovement.org/">Half the Sky</a>:<br /><br />"One reason women die in childbirth has to do with anatomy, arising from two basic evolutionary trade-offs. The first is that once our ancient ancestors began to walk upright, too large a pelvis made upright walking and running inefficient and exhausting. A narrow pelvis permits fast running. That however makes childbirth exceedingly difficult. So the evolutionary adaptation is that women generally have medium-sized pelvises that permit moderately swift locomotion and allow them to survive childbirth - most of the time.<br /><br />The other trade-off is head size. Beginning with our Cro-Magnon ancestors, human skull size expanded to accommodate more complex brains. Larger brains offer an evolutionary advantage once a child is born, but they increase the chance that a large-headed fetus will never emerge alive from the mother."Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-61499567909450086522009-10-29T12:40:00.003-04:002009-10-29T12:46:29.433-04:00Lag<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SunGh93ApKI/AAAAAAAAAPw/qzOoOsWIr4Q/s1600-h/Unemployment_1009.gif"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 396px; height: 400px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SunGh93ApKI/AAAAAAAAAPw/qzOoOsWIr4Q/s400/Unemployment_1009.gif" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5398063915223524514" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SunFmu4-E3I/AAAAAAAAAPo/wAvw5Ago9v0/s1600-h/GDP_1009.gif"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 216px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SunFmu4-E3I/AAAAAAAAAPo/wAvw5Ago9v0/s400/GDP_1009.gif" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5398062897592931186" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-17385272199452295552009-10-08T10:05:00.000-04:002009-10-08T10:06:12.827-04:00<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.pollster.com/flashcharts/scripts/javascript/loess.js"></script><object width="450" height="346"><param name="chart" value="http://www.pollster.com/flashcharts/flash/swfs/chart.swf?xml=http://www.pollster.com/flashcharts/content/xml/USObamaJobPresHealth.xml&choices=Disapprove,Approve&phone=&ivr=&internet=&mail=&smoothing=&from_date=&to_date=&min_pct=&max_pct=&grid=&points=&trends=&lines=&colors=Disapprove-BF0014,Approve-000000,Undecided-68228B&e=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="false"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.pollster.com/flashcharts/flash/swfs/chart.swf?xml=http://www.pollster.com/flashcharts/content/xml/USObamaJobPresHealth.xml&choices=Disapprove,Approve&phone=&ivr=&internet=&mail=&smoothing=&from_date=&to_date=&min_pct=&max_pct=&grid=&points=&trends=&lines=&colors=Disapprove-BF0014,Approve-000000,Undecided-68228B&e=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="false" allowScriptAccess="always" width="450" height="346"></embed></object>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-35442020288831256992009-10-07T08:43:00.004-04:002009-10-07T09:04:46.076-04:00Improving Self Reported BMI<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;">Many epidemiological studies measure adiposity</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 19px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:small;"> (obesity) through the surrogate BMI via self reported measures of height and weight. As I have mentioned before, there are many<a href="http://datadrivendecision.blogspot.com/2008/10/fat-asians.html"> problems</a> with this. But how can we improve on this while maintaining our level of accuracy and not using a direct measure requiring a more intensive doctor visit?</span></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px;font-size:small;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px;font-size:small;">Two ideas to use along with BMI:</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px;font-size:small;">1. Waist size - pant size for men, dress size for women</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" line-height: 19px;font-size:small;">2. Bench press - probably more reasonable for men. Could use max (weight you can bench press once), or weight you can bench press ten times.</span></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-41706091497836384922009-03-16T16:13:00.005-04:002009-03-16T18:27:04.451-04:00Does the NCAA Selection Committee Use Regression Analysis?The committees job is to pick and rank the 65 best college basketball teams (including those who won their conference tournaments). They want to choose the teams that are most likely to win games in the NCAA tournament. Now, regression analysis seems like a perfect tool for this type of dilemma, but does the selection committee use it?<br /><br />Based on the slow involvement of statistics in other sports, my guess is no.<br /><br />When college basketball experts talk about using "computers", I fear they are only talking comparing team's RPIs<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span>and Strength of Schedules via an eye test. The problem with these two measurements is that they are co-linear (a statistical way of saying too similar). All teams that have crappy RPIs are going to have crappy SOSs, like Penn State, since SOS is a part of RPI. Do we know how likely these measures predict success? I don't know, but there is a lot data from previous tournaments and it would be easy to determine. However, RPI and SOS would only explain a portion of the variability of the model. There are a lot of other variables that should be considered like record in the last 10 games, previous performance in tournaments, margin of victory, and potential injuries to key players. If these variables could help better predict a winning outcome (explain more of the variability in the model) then they should be included.<br /><br />Yeah it's a human decision, and the committee does look at these variables and takes them into account. But there is a huge amount of bias in a purely human decision. It should be the human's decision to determine the variables in the regression analysis that makes the final decision. The committee may think that RPI is the most important variable and deserves the most weight. This may be true, but their assumption should at least be tested by regression.<br /><br />During the selection show last night a committee member started to explain how they chose Arizona/Dayton over the other bubble teams. He emphasized that teams chosen were based on playing a competitive schedule throughout the year and winning quality games away from home. Of course Penn State had two huge road wins (MSU, Illinois) and Arizona didn't have any (and were 1-5 in their last six games). It's quite possible that the regression could have chosen the same 65 teams, but it would be interesting to see the analysis.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com24tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-65132578303693519582009-02-26T18:15:00.004-05:002009-02-26T18:28:49.076-05:00Say Goodbye to Humanities?<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/books/25human.html?pagewanted=2&em">Cool Article</a> in the NYT on the decline seen in humanities:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/Saci0bIpVHI/AAAAAAAAANo/ZkrqEWW5YRQ/s1600-h/24human.190.gif"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 190px; height: 273px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/Saci0bIpVHI/AAAAAAAAANo/ZkrqEWW5YRQ/s400/24human.190.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5307248969911981170" border="0" /></a><br />It's not too surprising since the cost of education has dramatically increased, students have desired more return for their education. Now many don't have the luxury of studying less directly applicable areas. I also wonder if humanities degrees were artificially high in the 60s and 70s from all those hippies. haha<br /><br />I agree in the article's point that Obama benefit the humanities field in multiple ways. He is a role model to many and he seems to greatly respect literature and philosophy. He also plans to make it more affordable to go to school through programs like the GI Bill and increased student aid. However, if the economy doesn't turn around, those points will probably be moot.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-74934473346064763402009-02-25T18:06:00.004-05:002009-02-25T18:49:42.793-05:00How Reliable is Health Advice?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaXYMOq3g0I/AAAAAAAAANg/sownFVjmVNo/s1600-h/heart-beat.gif"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 116px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaXYMOq3g0I/AAAAAAAAANg/sownFVjmVNo/s320/heart-beat.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306885440533922626" border="0" /></a><br />Via the <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/health/">Health Blog</a>:<blockquote><p>Just <span style="font-weight: bold;">11%</span> of more than 2,700 established heart recommendations are backed by high-quality testing, says a <a target="_blank" href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/301/8/831">study</a> in the current issue of JAMA.</p> <p>The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association jointly issue guidelines to doctors, WSJ explains. The ones thought to have the highest level of evidence are based on multiple randomized clinical trials. Those considered weakest are backed by expert opinion or case studies.</p></blockquote><p>According to the JAMA paper there are three type of sources:<br />1. Sources based on multiple randomized clinical trials (high quality testing)<br />2. Sources based on a single randomized clinical trial or observational study (moderate)<br />3. Sources based on case studies, expert opinion - etc (poor)<br /></p><p>As an epidemiologist, I will probably spend most of my time dealing with observational studies in the moderate category. While not "high quality", these are still important since many randomized control trials can not be conducted because of ethical, feasibility, and financial reasons. For example, we can't ethically conduct a randomized control trial on whether smoking causes lung cancer - since there is substantial evidence that we would inflecting harm in our control arm.<br /></p><p>However, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) should be used whenever possible because they are removing many biases and confounding from the relationship of interest. A<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormone_replacement_therapy_%28menopause%29"> classic case</a> of the benefit of RCTs is Hormone Replacement Theory (HRT) in women. The Nurses Health Study and others found a protective effect on mortality for HRT in several of their observational studies. Their evidence looked so convincing that hundreds of thousands of women went on the therapy. That was until randomized clinical trial results found that it can increase breast cancer and disease risk.<br /></p><p>Getting back to the JAMA article, it's pretty scary when you think about. Heart Disease is America's biggest killer, and quite possibly the most widely studied disease. What this says is that there is a lot of work to do in the health field and that there will be a lot of reversals, ala HRT, of doctor opinion in future recommendations.<br /></p><p>On a positive to note, I'm happy to say that we're headed in the right direction with this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/health/policy/16health.html?scp=3&sq=Comparative%20Effectiveness%20and%20HEalthcare%20&st=cse">$1.1 billion dollar allocation</a> to compartive effectiveness research in the stimulus package. Maybe <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/opinion/24beane.html?scp=5&sq=Comparative%20Effectiveness%20and%20HEalthcare%20&st=cse">Billy Beane </a>had Mr. Obama's ear?<br /></p><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-17941193039503929672009-02-23T22:21:00.003-05:002009-02-23T22:32:59.370-05:00NYT: Index Funds Win Again<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaNqOlVlo5I/AAAAAAAAANQ/6H9Fvf5YC9A/s1600-h/money1.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 324px; height: 320px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaNqOlVlo5I/AAAAAAAAANQ/6H9Fvf5YC9A/s400/money1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306201584745948050" border="0" /></a><br />I am a big fan of index funds, owing shares in three of them. So I was happy to read this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/22/your-money/stocks-and-bonds/22stra.html">recent article</a>:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"></span><blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;">Mr. Kritzman calculates that just to break even with the index fund, net of all expenses, the actively managed fund would have to outperform it by an average of 4.3 percentage points a year on a pre-expense basis. For the hedge fund, that margin would have to be 10 points a year.</span> <span style="font-style: italic;"><br /><br />The chances of finding such funds are next to zero, said Russell Wermers, a finance professor at the </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/university_of_maryland/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about University of Maryland">University of Maryland</a><span style="font-style: italic;">. Consider the 452 domestic equity mutual funds in the </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/morningstar-inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More information about Morningstar Incorporated">Morningstar</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> database that existed for the 20 years through January of this year. Morningstar reports that just 13 of those funds beat the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index by at least four percentage points a year, on average, over that period. That’s less than 3 out of every 100 funds.</span></blockquote><br />We'll see with these changing market conditions whether active mutual funds can continue their success of (almost always) swindling their clients.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-68867519751757028342009-02-23T14:27:00.003-05:002009-02-23T14:33:55.966-05:00Measuring Fat by MRI<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaL4wjUVkGI/AAAAAAAAANI/cRvOGvJueUI/s1600-h/mrifat.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 315px; height: 400px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SaL4wjUVkGI/AAAAAAAAANI/cRvOGvJueUI/s400/mrifat.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306076823993815138" border="0" /></a>A striking image that won a National Geographic Picture of Year award. The images are full body MRI shots of two women: 5'6" 250 lbs on the left, 5'5" 120 lbs on the right.<br /><br />Looks like there is a lot of alteration in most areas of the body except for brain and maybe the ankle area. I wonder if pictures like these could be used for the fight against obesity?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-86490515676527747132009-02-15T22:28:00.003-05:002009-02-15T22:37:05.095-05:001979 vs. 2009The New York Times and CBS has some nice new data out on a range of controversial issues. In this <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/SunMo_poll_0209.pdf">PDF</a>, they compare the data to records they have from the late 1970s.<br /><br />Here are a few I found notable:<br /><br /> HEALTH INSURANCE: PRIVATE ENTERPRISE VS. GOVERNMENT?<blockquote> <p><strong>1979</strong><br />Private Enterprise: 48%<br />Government - All Problems: 28%<br />Government - Emergencies: 12%<br />Don't know: 12%</p> <p><strong>2009</strong><br />Private Enterprise: 32% <em>(-16%)</em><br />Government - All Problems: 49% <em>(+21%)</em><br />Government - Emergencies: 10% <em>(-2%)</em><br />Don't know: 9% <em>(-3%)</em><br /></p><p>HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN ADULTS<strong><br /></strong></p><p><strong>1979</strong><br />Wrong: 62%<br />Not Wrong: 25<span style="font-weight: bold;">%</span></p><p><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><strong>2009</strong><br />Wrong: 41% <em>(-21%)</em><br />Not Wrong: 54% <em>(+29%)</em><br /></p><p>SHOULD MARIJUANA USE BE LEGALIZED?<strong><br /></strong></p><p><strong>1979</strong><br />Yes: 27%<br />No: 69%<strong><br /></strong></p><p><strong>2009</strong><br />Yes: 41% <em>(+14%)</em><br />No: 52% <em>(-17%)</em></p>WHO MAKES BETTER CARS?<br /><br />1979<br />U.S. Automakers - 46%<br />Foreign Automakers - 26%<br /><br />2009<br />U.S. Automakers - 29% (-17%)<br />Foreign Automakers - 55% (+29%)<br /> <blockquote> <blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> Hat tip to this <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/15/104953/279/886/697795">daily kos diary<br /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-19934776956415105282009-02-03T17:50:00.003-05:002009-02-03T18:11:58.310-05:00Most Popular Big CitesAnother cool study by <a href="http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1096/community-satisfaction-top-cities">Pew Research Center</a>:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SYjKn7vomMI/AAAAAAAAAKI/GzCcWMDusO8/s1600-h/1096-2.gif"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 157px; height: 400px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SYjKn7vomMI/AAAAAAAAAKI/GzCcWMDusO8/s400/1096-2.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5298707749002582210" border="0" /></a>I noticed, now that we're in the dead of winter, that most of the top cities are in warmer climates. I've never been to Denver (which seems to buck my observation), but maybe the air up there is just making them happy.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-3600845041331423382009-01-27T19:47:00.004-05:002009-01-27T19:52:20.889-05:00Teenage Sex StatsFrom the Latest Well Article from <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/health/27well.html?_r=1">Tara Parker-Pope:</a><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Today, fewer than half of all high school students have had sex: 47.8 percent as of 2007, according to the National Youth Risk Behavior Survey, down from 54.1 percent in 1991.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">A less recent report suggests that teenagers are also waiting longer to have sex than they did in the past. A 2002 report from the </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/h/health_and_human_services_department/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Health and Human Services Department, U.S." target="_blank">Department of Health and Human Services</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> found that 30 percent of 15- to 17-year-old girls had experienced sex, down from 38 percent in 1995. During the same period, the percentage of sexually experienced boys in that age group dropped to 31 percent from 43 percent.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"> About 16 percent of teenagers say they have had oral sex but haven't yet had intercourse. </span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">"I give presentations nationwide where I'm showing people that the virginity rate in college is higher than you think and the number of partners is lower than you think and hooking up more often than not does not mean intercourse," Dr. Bogle said. "But so many people think we're morally in trouble, in a downward spiral and teens are out of control. It's very difficult to convince people otherwise."</span><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/health/27well.html?_r=1" target="_blank"></a><br />I wonder how these sex rates compare to the 1960s and 70s. Have rates significantly increased or are parents just hypocrites? While the given oral sex statistic is interesting, I wonder how many sexually active teens engage in oral sex. It sounds like the article is assuming that basically all of the sexually active teens engage in both.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-35519810912252295592009-01-23T18:53:00.004-05:002009-01-23T19:14:53.317-05:00Ryan Howard's Arbitration CaseI have been frequenting <a href="htttp://www.fangraphs.com"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">fangraphs</span>.com</a> recently, which is a great site for lots of cool baseball data and analysis. I recommend it for all the baseball stat nerds out there.<br /><br />Recently Ryan Howard, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Phillies</span> first base slugger, is in the news for having the biggest difference between <a href="http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/01/arbitration-fig.html">arbitration figures submitted</a>. Howard is asking for 18 million, while the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Phillies</span> submitted a figure of 14 million. Last year, in his first arbitration year, Howard took home a<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3"></span> record 10 million for actually taking his case to arbitration judges and winning.<br /><br />So in terms of arbitration, major league players have three arbitration years. <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> is in his 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">nd</span> year. According to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Fangraphs</span>, estimates on what players get are 40% of their free market value their 1st year, 60% their 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">nd</span> year, and 80% their 3rd year. So <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> should be getting about 60 percent of his free market value. <br /><br />The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Phillies</span> with their 14 million dollar offer, think <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> is worth 19.6 million/year.<br /><span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> with his 18 million dollar suggestion, thinks he's worth 25.2 million/year.<br /><br />So basically <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> thinks he deserves the 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">nd</span> highest contract in league after <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">ARod</span>, who <a href="http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/05/most-lucrative-contracts.html">makes 27.5 million/year</a>.<br /><br />Looking at <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">Fangraphs</span> data, here are what the top <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">Phillies</span> were "worth" based on last year's production:<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">1. </span>Chase <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">Utley</span><span style="font-style: italic;">: 35.7 million</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">2. Jimmy Rollins: 23.1 million</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">3. Jayson </span><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">Werth</span><span style="font-style: italic;">: 21.3 million</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">4. Cole </span><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">Hamels</span><span style="font-style: italic;">: 20.6 million</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">5. </span>Shane <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">Victarino</span><span style="font-style: italic;">: 17.0 million</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"> 6. Ryan </span><span style="font-style: italic;" class="nfakPe">Howard</span><span style="font-style: italic;">: 14.1 million</span><br /><br />The stats take into account his defense, replacement level (1b) performance, OPS (which went down .100 this year), and many other measures.<br /><br /><span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> has regressed the past three years, but considering his great 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">nd</span> half he will hopefully preform better next year. The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">Phils</span> take that into account giving him a "19.6 million/year" deal (5.5 million more than he "made" last year).<br /><br />Yes - <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> wants the 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">nd</span> "highest" salary in the major leagues, when he was potentially the 6<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">th</span> most valuable Philly last year.<br /><br />It will be interesting to see what happens if this goes to arbitration. Do these arbitration judges think like MVP voters (Howard finished 2nd in NL MVP voting) or do they take into account statistics other than HR and RBI? I think either way <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> will lose his case.<br /><br />EDIT:<br />A <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/howard-heading-to-court/">good point </a>(by a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">fangraphs</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">contributor</span>) was made that needs to be considered.<br /><br />He basically believes that Howard cannot be <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">considered</span> like a typical arbitration case, which would normally fall under the 40/60/80 rule. The problem with <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> is that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">Phillies</span> took awhile (age 26?) in calling him up (since they had <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">Thome</span>). Assuming the arbitration judges aren't ignorant like MVP<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25"></span> voters, they probably rewarded <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> 10 million last year because he really should be in his 3rd year of arbitration (not his 2<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">nd</span>). I can understand that logic a bit more. If you make that assumption, <span class="nfakPe">Howard</span> only thinks he's worth 21.6 million, which is a bit high but more understandable. In the above article, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">fangraphs</span> author used 2009 projections to calculate that Howard would be worth approximately 15 million (assuming he's in his "third" year of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">arb</span>.)<br /><br />So it could go either way I guess, but I still don't think he's worth the money. <div> </div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-12441714207022116712009-01-23T18:44:00.003-05:002009-01-23T19:19:14.141-05:00Stat of the Week: Hospitials as HotelsAccording to <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w14619.pdf">a paper</a> from the National Bureau of Economic Research<br /><br />"We also find that a one-standard-deviation increase in amenities raises a hospital's demand by 38.4% on average, whereas demand is substantially less responsive to clinical quality as measured by pneumonia mortality."<br /><br />-It's interesting they used pneumonia mortality as a measure of clinical quality. I can only read the abstract, but I would assume that they adjusted for confounders and such like a good epidemiologist would do.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-36889584102705193062009-01-23T18:32:00.005-05:002009-01-23T18:40:23.455-05:00Media Attention and Risk PerceptionFrom a <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/who-lives-and-who-dies-in-a-plane-crash/">Freaknomics interview of author Ben Sherwood</a>:<br /><br /><div class="w35 left"><img class="q" src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs_v3/nyt_universal/q.gif" alt="Question" /></div> <p> Can a positive outcome to a crash like USAir 1549 change often unrealistic public perceptions of the fatality of plane crashes? </p> <div class="w35 left"><img class="a" src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs_v3/nyt_universal/a.gif" alt="Answer" /></div> <p> I doubt it. It’s incredibly safe to fly — your chances of dying on your next domestic flight are just one in 60 million — but many Americans are still petrified of air travel. </p> <p>It’s no surprise: Plane crashes monopolize media coverage. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Indeed, one MIT study found that airplane crash coverage on the front page of </span><em style="font-weight: bold;">The New York Times</em><span style="font-weight: bold;"> was 60 times greater than reporting on HIV/AIDS per 1,000 deaths; 1,500 times greater than reporting on auto hazards; and 6,000 times greater than cancer.</span></p><p><span style="font-weight: bold;">-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span></p><p>Now, the key to this passage is they only looked at the front page. Still, it's very interesting and telling on why our perceived risks rarely match the actual risks.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></p><p><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-87716590470199402702009-01-12T12:44:00.010-05:002009-01-12T21:15:14.717-05:00Our (Potential) Future Surgeon General and Marijuana LegalizationBefore I begin, I implore to you watch this Daily Show clip on Dr. Gupta. <span class="description"> Aasif Mandvi does a great job. I hadn't laughed that hard in awhile. (start at minute 2 for the good stuff)<br /></span><br /><span class="description"><div class="cc_show" style="overflow: hidden; position: relative; background-color: rgb(229, 229, 229); padding-left: 3px; height: 14px; padding-top: 2px;"><a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/" target="_blank">The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a><span style="position: absolute; top: 2px; right: 3px;">M - Th 11p / 10c</span></div><div class="cc_title" style="padding: 1px 3px 3px; overflow: hidden; font-size: 11px; color: rgb(134, 134, 134); background-color: rgb(245, 245, 245); line-height: 14px; height: 21px;"><a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=215313&title=medicine-cabinet" target="_blank">Medicine Cabinet</a></div></span><span class="description"><embed style="float: left; clear: left;" src="http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:215313" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="window" allowfullscreen="true" flashvars="autoPlay=false" allowscriptaccess="always" allownetworking="all" bgcolor="#000000" height="301" width="360"></embed><div class="cc_links" style="border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(207, 207, 207) rgb(207, 207, 207); border-width: 0px 1px 1px; float: left; clear: left; width: 358px; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,Verdana,sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; color: rgb(185, 185, 185); background-color: rgb(245, 245, 245);"><div style="width: 177px; float: left; padding-left: 3px;"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=166515&title=Barack-Obama-Pt.-1">Barack Obama Interview</a><br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=167938&title=John-McCain-Pt.-1">John McCain Interview</a></div><div style="width: 177px; float: left;"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?searchterm=Sarah+Palin&searchtype=site&x=0&y=0">Sarah Palin Video</a><br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?searchterm=indecision+2008&searchtype=site&x=0&y=0">Funny Election Video</a></div></div><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span><br /><span class="description"><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></span><br /><span class="description"><br />Anyway, Dr. Gupta recently wrote an article for Time Magazine entitled "<a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1552034,00.html?xid=newsletter-weekly">Why I would vote No on Pot</a>". I'm </span>pretty disappointed in this article by our (potential) future surgeon general. He brings to light both sides of the issue, but I don't think he argues his case very well.<br /><br />So what did he bring up in the article (which leaves out other valid arguments for both sides):<br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />positives of legalizing pot</span><br />- can help really sick people - those going through chemo, and those suffering from Alzheimer's<br />- 15 million people all ready use it, so wouldn't have to enforce law on them<br />- cut illegal drug trafficking and make communities safer<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;"> negatives of legalizing pot</span><br />- addiction<br />- affect short term memory<br />- impair cognitive ability<br />- lead to long term depression or anxiety<br />- can impair driving - cause accidents<br /><br />First off I am disappointed by the lack of statistics. From this article I have no idea how <span style="font-style: italic;">severely</span> pot affects short term memory, leads to long term depression, etc. A reasonable question would be, how do these negatives compare to alcohol? It seems that alcohol shares all of these negative consequences and is potentially worse in some cases. He also suggests outcomes that are rather subjective like depression, cognitive ability, etc. It is not nearly as clear cut as tobacco's relationship to lung cancer and other disease. I don't doubt his medical claims, but he should at least link to scientific/epidemiological studies supporting it.<br /><br />So how authoritarian is Sanjay Gupta? Yes, it would be better medically if we banned alcohol and soda - but is it the right move for the country? There are reasonable reasons to keep marijuana illegal, but Dr. Gupta needs to bring a little more substance to his argument. Granted this was just a short article for Time Magazine, but adding links similar to Frank Rich's style at the New York Times would be refreshing.<br /><br />One of my major reasons for reluctance of Gupta for Surgeon General is his lack of public health training or experience. If this is the way he would describe a public health epidemic in the future as surgeon general, consider me unimpressed.<br /><br />Looking further at the Marijuana issue as a whole:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/19561/Who-Supports-Marijuana-Legalization.aspx">Gallup polling</a> has explored the legalization of Marijuana question for years, and while support is still on Dr. Gupta's side the margin is eroding.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SWuHjzamHsI/AAAAAAAAAJY/wqLWaYZAAUk/s1600-h/20051101b_1.gif"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 295px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SWuHjzamHsI/AAAAAAAAAJY/wqLWaYZAAUk/s400/20051101b_1.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5290471236443709122" border="0" /></a><br /><br />When asked if medical marijuana should be legalized, support jumps into the <a href="http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3392">70 percent range</a>. Dr. Gupta points out that 11 states have all ready decriminalized marijuana for medical use. I honestly believe that polling (on legalization of both medical and recreational) would change if people were more informed on this subject.<br /><br />For example, there is a very valid economic argument that would play well in today's economic situation.<br /><br />Jeffery Miron an economist from Harvard conservatively <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/07/commentary/wastler/wastler/">estimates</a> that the US could receive <span style="font-weight: bold;">14 billion dollars</span> a year from the legalization of marijuana. "...the government would save $7.7 billion a year if it didn't have to spend money policing and prosecuting marijuana activity. Then, if the feds taxed marijuana at a rate comparable to cigarettes and booze, another $6.2 billion would come rolling in."<br /><br />It will be interesting to see if any "change" is made on this issue with the Obama administration, considering it's the "<a href="http://www.change.org/ideas?order=top#listSection">#1 Idea</a>" proposed on their site change.org.<br /><span class="description"><br /></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-65498602879922621312008-12-27T00:07:00.011-05:002008-12-27T01:12:41.821-05:00How Do Men Die in the Prime of their Lives?<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SVXAw0hkAzI/AAAAAAAAAJQ/RGxa26mP6Ig/s1600-h/familyguy-deathisabitch_1217532992.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5284341682754814770" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 300px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SVXAw0hkAzI/AAAAAAAAAJQ/RGxa26mP6Ig/s400/familyguy-deathisabitch_1217532992.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><div>My friends and I are reaching a milestone soon - a quarter century lived. Our own deaths are probably very far from our minds, and for good reason: about 2 percent of male deaths come from the 25-34 category. So while small, it is not insignificant and worth looking at.<br /><br />According to the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/men/lcod/04all.pdf">CDC</a> in 2004 - the following are the top ten causes of death for males in the United States between the ages of 25-34.<br /><br />1. Unintentional Injury - 34.8%<br />2. Suicide - 14.6%<br />3. Homicide - 13.3%<br />4. Heart Disease - 7.6%<br />5. Cancer - 6.2%<br />6. HIV Disease - 3.2%<br />7. Diabetes - 1.2 %<br />8. Stroke - 1.0%<br />9. Birth Defects - 0.8%<br />10. Chronic Liver Disease - 0.8%<br /></div><div><br />Unsurprisingly, most of the deaths are not related to traditional disease: accidents (probably mostly automobile), suicide, and murder. This possibly suggests the need for better mental health counseling, which is an area I know very little about - including it's effectiveness and differences between nations.</div><br /><div>What surprised me the most in these numbers is the rate of heart disease. Every year a couple of thousand in this young age group are dying of heart disease. I'm interested to know who these people are. Do they have some genetic defect that makes them especially vulnerable? Do they smoke a lot? Are they morbidly obese? </div><br /><div>I'll break down the cancer rates in a later post, but younger males should look for cancer in the testis, the blood cancers (lymphoma), and skin cancer (melanoma). </div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div><br /></div>When <a href="http://www.disastercenter.com/cdc/111riske.html">broadening</a> to include females and between 25-44...<br /><br /><br /><table width="60%" border="1" style="color:#ffcc99;"><tbody><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">Causes of Death </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">Number of Deaths </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">Rate per 100,000 </span></b></td></tr><tr style="color:#ffffcc;"><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">25-44 years All causes </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">148,904 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">177.8 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">1 Accidents and adverse effects </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">26,554 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">31.7 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">. . . Motor vehicle accidents </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">14,528 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">17.3 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">. . . All other accidents and adverse effects </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">12,026 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">14.4 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">2 Human immunodeficiency virus infection </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">22,795 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">27.2 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">3 Malignant neoplasms, including neoplasms of lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">22,147 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">26.4 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">4 Diseases of heart </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">16,261 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">19.4 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">5 Suicide </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">12,536 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">15 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">6 Homicide and legal intervention </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">9,261 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">11.1 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">7 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">4,230 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">5.1 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">8 Cerebrovascular diseases </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">3,418 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">4.1 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">9 Diabetes mellitus</span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">2,520 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">3 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">10 Pneumonia and influenza </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">1,972 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">2.4 </span></b></td></tr><tr><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">. . . All other causes (Residual) </span></b></td><td><b><span style="color:#999999;">27,210 </span></b></td><td><b><span style="font-size:0;"><span style="font-size:100%;color:#999999;">32.5</span> </span></b></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><p>You can notice the homicide and suicide rates are down, while Cancer and HIV increase. However this data is a bit older (1996), so the HIV mortality rate has gone down in recent years. </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-70325510195443631812008-12-18T07:59:00.016-05:002009-02-26T18:29:19.851-05:00A Look Back at my Election Predictions<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SVVdHxluF-I/AAAAAAAAAJI/vgY5pOmb4OA/s1600-h/finalactual_map.png"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5284232125941159906" style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; width: 355px; height: 240px; text-align: center;" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SVVdHxluF-I/AAAAAAAAAJI/vgY5pOmb4OA/s400/finalactual_map.png" border="0" /></a><br /><div><em><a href="http://datadrivendecision.blogspot.com/2008/11/election-predictions.html">Predictions:</a></em></div><div>House: D - 260, R - 175 </div><div>Senate: D - 58, R- 40</div><div>Presidential EV: 368-170 Obama</div><div>Popular Vote: 53.6 to 45.1 Obama</div><br /><div><em>Actual:</em></div><div>House: D - 257, R - 178</div><div>Senate: D - 57, R - 41 (assuming <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Franken</span> wins)</div><div>Presidential EV: 365-173 Obama</div><div>Presidential <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">PV</span>: 52.9 to 45.7 Obama</div><br /><div>Not too shabby. I was correct on every state except Montana, which was closer than expected. The pollsters did a pretty good job this year with all the variables they needed to take into account: the new voters, the cell phone effect, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">bradley</span> effect, and the shy <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">tory</span> factor among others. I thought the cell phone effect would boost Obama up a little more than it did, but I was still within about 1 percentage point. I'm sure if I had confidence intervals (which I should have), the actual results would have been within them.</div><br /><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>In the House and Senate races the republicans did a little better than expected. With Bush's <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">favorablity</span> rating hovering in the low 20s, it's pretty impressive how several of his supporters held onto their house seats. It's interesting that many of those who lost were on the moderate side, leaving mostly more <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">conservative</span> republicans left. I think this election as a whole indicates that Change was <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">definitely</span> desired, but the Democrats will need to show real progress in the next 2 and 4 years if they want to keep their command.</div><br /><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>If you're interested, check out how the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/02/election-predictions-pund_n_140149.html">"expert" pundits</a> did on predicting election. It was probably a lot of luck, but I did better than almost all of them. </div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-89495347160041961672008-12-14T02:44:00.007-05:002008-12-14T13:52:21.506-05:00Women Concentrate on the Wrong Organ (too)Fear is an interesting concept that I hope to explore more in the future.<br /><br />In a 2005 study by Women's Health Research, over 1000 women were asked - which disease they feared the most. I was rather surprised they found the fear of Breast Cancer more than doubled Heart Disease. While Breast Cancer caused approximately 3% of the US deaths in 2005, over 22 percent have the most fear for the disease. On the other hand, heart disease accounts for 28.6 percent of diseases and only 9.7 percent consider their top fear!! I know the US society has placed a higher emphasis of breasts over heart, but I can't say I expected this.<br /><br /><br /><table str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 268pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="358"><col style="width: 35pt;" width="47"> <col style="width: 59pt;" width="79"> <col style="width: 57pt;" width="76"> <col style="width: 69pt;" width="92"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 51pt;" height="68"> <td class="xl32" style="height: 51pt; width: 35pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;" height="68" width="47">Fear Rank</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl25" style="width: 59pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;" width="79">Disease</td> <td class="xl25" style="border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;" width="76">Women's Most Feared Diseases</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl31" style="width: 69pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;" width="92">Cause of Death in Women</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="width: 48pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: center;" width="64">Difference</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 38.25pt;" height="51"> <td style="height: 38.25pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="51">1</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Cancer (unspecified)</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="0.24" width="76">24.00%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="0.216">21.60%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="2.3999999999999994E-2" fmla="=(C2-D2)">2.40%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 56.25pt;" height="75"> <td style="height: 56.25pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="75">2</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl30" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; color: rgb(0, 204, 204); text-align: center;" width="79">Breast Cancer</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="0.221" width="76">22.10%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="3.2399999999999998E-2">3.24%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="color: rgb(51, 204, 255); text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="0.18859999999999999" fmla="=(C3-D3)">18.86%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 49.5pt;" height="66"> <td style="height: 49.5pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="66">3</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl29" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; color: rgb(255, 0, 0); text-align: center;" width="79">Heart Disease</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="9.7000000000000003E-2" width="76">9.70%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="0.28599999999999998">28.60%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0); text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="-0.18899999999999997" fmla="=(C4-D4)">-18.90%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="17">4</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">HIV/AIDS</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="9.2999999999999999E-2" width="76">9.30%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl28" num="0.02">2%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="7.2999999999999995E-2" fmla="=(C5-D5)">7.30%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.5pt;" height="34"> <td style="height: 25.5pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="34">5</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Alzheimer’s Disease</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="4.5999999999999999E-2" width="76">4.60%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="3.4000000000000002E-2">3.40%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="1.1999999999999997E-2" fmla="=(C6-D6)">1.20%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.5pt;" height="34"> <td style="height: 25.5pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="34">6</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Ovarian Cancer</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="2.7E-2" width="76">2.70%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="1.2999999999999999E-2">1.30%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="1.4E-2" fmla="=(C7-D7)">1.40%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 36.75pt;" height="49"> <td style="height: 36.75pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="49">7</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Lung Cancer</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="2.4E-2" width="76">2.40%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="5.62E-2">5.62%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="-3.2199999999999999E-2" fmla="=(C8-D8)">-3.22%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="17">8</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Diabetes</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="2.4E-2" width="76">2.40%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="3.1E-2">3.10%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="-6.9999999999999993E-3" fmla="=(C9-D9)">-0.70%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 25.5pt;" height="34"> <td style="height: 25.5pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="34">9</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; text-align: center;" width="79">Colon Cancer</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="1.6E-2" width="76">1.60%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="1.9400000000000001E-2">1.94%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="-3.4000000000000002E-3" fmla="=(C10-D10)">-0.34%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; text-align: center;" num="" height="17">10</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td class="xl29" style="border-top: medium none; width: 59pt; color: rgb(255, 0, 0); text-align: center;" width="79">Stroke</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none; width: 57pt; text-align: center;" num="1.2E-2" width="76">1.20%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="0.08">8.00%</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: center;"><br /></td><td style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0); text-align: center;" class="xl26" num="-6.8000000000000005E-2" fmla="=(C11-D11)">-6.80%</td> </tr> </tbody></table><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">So what are the possible explanations for this?<br /></span><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />High Incidence?</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>-While the mortality of breast cancer is low, there is a significant amount of women living and bravely battling the disease. On the other hand, the same can be said about heart disease.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Feeling of Control</span><br />-While risk factors such as diet, obesity, and hormones have been established, the cause for breast cancer can still be considered quite a mystery. So most women likely believe that she could develop BC and don't have the power to control it. The risk factors for heart disease - (diet, physical activity, smoking) are a bit more established, so women's feeling of control may be stronger for CHD.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Public Exposure</span><br />-Another explanation is that breast cancer has had stronger activists<span style=""></span>, fundraisers, and lobbyists that push the disease into the mainstream. The general wisdom may be that since Breast Cancer is getting the same or more ad time than Heart Disease - women's risk of death are great for BC.<br /><br />*Edit*<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Age of Disease</span><br />Women may believe that they are more likely to get Breast Cancer at a younger age than Heart Disease. According to SEER the median age of dianosis is 61, while the median age of death is 69. For heart disease the average age of a first heart attack is around 70 years old (though the disease can be caught at a much earlier stage).<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Women still believe it's a male disease</span><br />The stereotypical person with heart disease (at least in my mind) is an overweight, red faced guy in a suit. Women only comprise of about 25 percent of heart studies, and things like this need to change.<br /><span style="font-style: italic;"></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Conclusion:</span><br />Heart disease kills about 8 times the women than Breast Cancer. The medical community needs to do a better job about expressing this risk. Maybe when people go to their primary doc, they should be asked this "what disease do you fear the most" question. Then the education can begin. Another idea is instead of counseling by doctor, people should have a "medical counclier" who discuss peoples risk of disease and what they can do for prevention. <span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>According to the Women's Heart fact sheet only 2 percent of the NIH budget is spent on prevention, and that is just flat out wrong .<br /><br />2005 data from:<br /><a href="http://www.cdc.gov/Women/lcod.htm">CDC</a><a href="http://www.womenshealthresearch.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5459&news_iv_ctrl=0&abbr=press_"><br />Women's Health Research</a><a href="www.hooah4health.com/prevention/whealth/whdfactsheet.htm"><br />Women's Heart Fact Sheet</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-75050673262839465992008-12-13T14:00:00.006-05:002008-12-13T14:23:48.419-05:00The All-Time Greatest College Football Teams: Where are they Headed?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SUQIdOeVdlI/AAAAAAAAAIo/vPMKMdBgCSM/s1600-h/collegefootball.png"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 80px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/SUQIdOeVdlI/AAAAAAAAAIo/vPMKMdBgCSM/s400/collegefootball.png" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5279353961379624530" border="0" /></a><br />(rankings as of 12/3/08, click on table for larger image)<br /><br />The teams highlighted blue are likely to advance in the rankings in the future, while the teams in red look like they will fall based on the last ten year win percentage, 2009 recruiting rank, and current BCS rank. Any suggestions on how to make this more scientific?<br /><br />Teams with a conference championship (Big Twelve, SEC) have a slight advantage. I also give an advantage t0 two teams with nice locations (USC, Texas). Let's not kid ourselves - many good players would rather play in the sun at USC instead of frigid State College. Notice Alabama has the worst win percentage in the last ten year, but seems to be turning it around with a nice year and a quality recruiting class. Nebraska and Tennessee seemed to be failing out of the spotlight lately, and with poor performances on the field and with recruiting it will be tough to regain momentum. Notre Dame has really lost it's luster lately, and it doesn't look like Charlie Weis will be the one to bring them back.<br /><br />Pretty amazing how these powerhouses just keep going. Five of the top 10 teams are going to be playing the top tier bowls.<br /><br />Notes:<br />1. Win percentage statistics generated by <a href="http://football.stassen.com/">stassen</a>.<a href="http://football.stassen.com/"> </a><br /><div>2. <a href="http://www.kiva.net/%7Ejsagarin/sports/cfsend.htm">rankings</a> of non-bcs teams from usa today.</div>3. 2009 recruiting rankings from <a href="http://rivals100.rivals.com/teamrank.asp?Year=2009&Page=2&PosType=0&Sort=0">rivals</a><br /><br /><p> </p><p> </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-23341707459753337112008-12-10T08:10:00.010-05:002008-12-10T16:37:52.429-05:00Vaccines, Autism, and the Stupid MediaFrom <a href="http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12725316">the Economist</a>: <div><div><br /><div><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/ST_AXGHZDNI/AAAAAAAAAH4/FE8r6tE3SC8/s1600-h/CBR544.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5278148791312649426" style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; width: 270px; height: 262px; text-align: center;" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/ST_AXGHZDNI/AAAAAAAAAH4/FE8r6tE3SC8/s400/CBR544.gif" border="0" /></a><br /><div>Why the sudden spike in Measles when we have a vaccine?</div><br /><div>"The rise, says the HPA, is due to a fall in vaccination rates. In 1998 91% of two-year-olds were immunised, but by 2004 that had fallen to 80%, far below the 90% rate needed to keep the disease under control....Happily, the dip in vaccination seems to have been temporary. Immunisation rates today are 85% and rising"</div><br /></div><div>Why the drop in Vaccination rate? </div><div></div><div>Thank you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy">Dr. Wakefield</a>....</div><div><br />"In the <a title="United Kingdom" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom">UK</a>, the MMR vaccine was the subject of controversy after publication of a 1998 paper by <a title="Andrew Wakefield" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield">Andrew Wakefield</a> et al. reporting a study of twelve children who had <a class="mw-redirect" title="Autism spectrum disorder" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum_disorder">autism spectrum disorders</a> and bowel symptoms, in many cases with onset observed soon after administration of MMR vaccine.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-22">[23]</a> During a 1998 press conference, Wakefield suggested that giving children the vaccines in three separate doses would be safer than a single injection. This suggestion was not supported by the paper, and several subsequent peer-reviewed studies have failed to show any association between the vaccine and autism.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-NHS-23">[24]</a> Administering the vaccines in three separate doses does not reduce the chance of adverse effects, and it increases the opportunity for infection by the two diseases not immunized against first.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-NHS-23">[24]</a><a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-24">[25]</a> Health experts have criticized media reporting of the MMR-autism controversy for triggering a decline in vaccination rates.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-25">[26]</a><br />In 2004, after an investigation by <a title="The Sunday Times" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times">The Sunday Times</a>,<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-Deer-so-far-26">[27]</a> the interpretation section of the study, which identified a general association in time between the vaccine and autism, was formally retracted by ten of Wakefield's twelve coauthors.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-27">[28]</a> The <a class="mw-redirect" title="Centers for Disease Control" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centers_for_Disease_Control">Centers for Disease Control</a>,<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-28">[29]</a> the <a title="Institute of Medicine" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Medicine">Institute of Medicine</a> of the <a title="United States National Academy of Sciences" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Academy_of_Sciences">National Academy of Sciences</a>,<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-29">[30]</a> the UK <a title="National Health Service" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service">National Health Service</a><a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-30">[31]</a> and the Cochrane Library review<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-Cochrane-8">[9]</a> have all concluded that there is no evidence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.<br />In 2007 Wakefield became the subject of a <a title="General Medical Council" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Medical_Council">General Medical Council</a> disciplinary hearing over allegations that his research had received funding related to litigation against MMR-vaccine manufacturers, and had concealed this fact from the editors of <a title="The Lancet" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lancet">The Lancet</a>.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-31">[32]</a> It was later revealed that Wakefield received £435,643 [about $780,000] plus expenses for consulting work related to the lawsuit. This funding came from the UK legal aid fund, a fund intended to provide legal services to the poor.<a title="" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine#cite_note-Deer-so-far-26">[27]</a>" </div><div></div><div><br /></div><div>It's sad what the scientifically illiterate media has done to this issue. I'm also disappointed in the political leaders like Tony Blair who would not reveal if his child was vaccinated or not. You don't mess with diseases like Measles when there is no scientific or epidemiological backup on the subject. Some random doctor speculating does not count... </div><div></div><div><br /></div><div></div><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5278150312653735906" style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; width: 380px; height: 230px; text-align: center;" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/ST_BvpjXx-I/AAAAAAAAAIQ/KMi7FrgCzTY/s400/Measles_incidence-cdc.gif" border="0" /></div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-879279617518137386.post-29296196398795227192008-11-29T23:34:00.007-05:002008-11-30T00:01:30.639-05:00Stat of the Week: Health Care CostsAccording to 2005 Paul <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Krugman</span> article at the <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9807E6DF113EF936A25757C0A9639C8B63">New York Times</a>:<br /><br />The following is per <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">capita</span> spending on Health Care<br /><br /><blockquote> <p><strong>United States:</strong> $5,267 on health care/ <strong>$2,364 is government spending.</strong><br /><strong>Canada:</strong> $2,931 on health care / <strong>$2,048 is government spending.</strong><br /><strong>France:</strong> $2,736 on health care / <strong>$2,080 is government spending.</strong></p></blockquote><br />It's amazing how high our health care spending is. Hard to believe that our government spending on health care (medicare, medicaid, etc) is more than Canada and France's <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">govt</span> spending! My thoughts are that the biggest faults are the administrative costs that come with our insurance system. However I'm starting to believe that United States does not evaluate health decisions correctly, for instance over-<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">emphasizing</span> screening that does not extend or improve lives. More on this later, but as you can see in the <a href="http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/spend.php">following graph</a>...yeah it's a problem.<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/STIbOrfSJoI/AAAAAAAAAHw/TT0FMa8YUnY/s1600-h/cost_longlife75.gif"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 309px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WjuSP6znhXc/STIbOrfSJoI/AAAAAAAAAHw/TT0FMa8YUnY/s400/cost_longlife75.gif" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5274308052610328194" border="0" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3