Friday, September 11, 2009
Infant-mortality myths
Back in the day, some people would "say" anything to get their way.
Now, the new improved version is to manipulate and/or misrepresent statistics, which most of us have no way of checking out...
Now, the new improved version is to manipulate and/or misrepresent statistics, which most of us have no way of checking out...
Michael Arnold Glueckand Robert J. Cihak write at OCRegister.com:
"Statistics, even at their best, don't tell a whole story. A variety of people employ medical statistics dubiously to push pet causes.
A perfect example: infant mortality statistics. The officially reported U.S. infant mortality rate has been indisputably high compared with similarly industrialized countries since at least the 1920s.
That fact has led to public health officials in the U.S. to conclude the rates are "caused" by poorly distributed health care resources and can be "solved" with a socialized, government-run health care system.
However, there's a basic problem with the numbers: Different countries count differently.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO) definition, all babies showing any signs of life - such as muscle activity, a gasp for breath or a heartbeat - should be counted as a live birth. The U.S. strictly follows this definition. But many other countries do not."
