satt comments on Rationality Quotes May 2013 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: katydee 03 May 2013 08:02PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (387)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: satt 08 May 2013 10:34:10PM *  1 point [-]

you'll find McArdle quoting predictions of tens of thousands of preventable deaths yearly from non-insured status. That looks to me like a pretty big hazard rate, no?

No. The Oracle says there're about 50 million Americans without health insurance. The predictions you quoted refer to 18,000 or 27,000 deaths for want of insurance per year. The higher number implies only a 0.054% death rate per year, or a 3.5% death rate over 65 years (Americans over 65 automatically get insurance). This is non-negligible but hardly huge (and potentially important for all that).

Edit: and I see gwern has whupped me here.

Comment author: Vaniver 08 May 2013 11:01:17PM *  0 points [-]

The higher number implies only a 0.054% death rate per year

Eyeballing the statistics, that looks like a hazard ratio between 1.1 and 1.5 (lots of things are good predictors for mortality that you would want to control for that I haven't; the more you add, the closer that number should get to 1.1).

Comment author: satt 08 May 2013 11:29:14PM 1 point [-]

It looks like you're referring to a hazard ratio or maybe a relative risk, neither of which are the same as a "hazard rate" AFAIK.

Comment author: Vaniver 08 May 2013 11:56:32PM 1 point [-]

You're right; I'm thinking of hazard ratios. Editing.