Три вида лжи...
Dec. 6th, 2016 09:08 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reytsmanНе так давно было обсуждение, что согласно тому что пишет ЦРУ в своём справочнике на Кубе прекрасная жизнь которая по доходам населения гораздо ближе к Боснии и Герциговине, чем к Гондурасу.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/
Несложный анализ показал, что ВВП на 70% состоит из услуг, которые считаются в песо (то которое песо, а не чеки из берёзки для туристов, которые песо конвертируемое)... то есть какую экономику хочешь, такую и рисуешь.
Но в экономике, я разбираюсь чуть лучше, чем в медицине, а вот про медицину прочитал сегодня... как при помощи нехитрой статистики сделать "хорошую медицину на мировом уровне" и чудовищного говна.
As I mentioned on Monday, Cuban doctors face penalties for not meeting their “infant mortality” targets. As a result, they use extreme measures ranging from abortion against the mother’s will to sterilization and isolation. They also have an incentive to lie…(pretty obvious right?)
How can they lie? By re-categorizing early neonatal (from birth to 7th day) or neonatal deaths (up to 28th day) as late fetal deaths. Early neonatal deaths and late fetal deaths are basically grouped together at “perinatal” deaths since they share the same factors. Normally, health statistics suggest that late fetal deaths and early neonatal deaths should be heavily correlated (the graph below makes everything clearer). However late fetal deaths do not enter inside the infant mortality rates while the early neonatal deaths do enter that often-cited rate (see graph below).
Normally, the ratio of late fetal deaths to early neonatal deaths should be more or less constant across space. In the PERISTAT data (the one that best divides those deaths), most countries have a ratio of late fetal to early neonatal deaths ranging from 1.04 to 3.03. Cuba has a ratio of more than 6. This is pretty much a clear of data manipulation.
In a recent article published in Cuban Studies, Roberto Gonzales makes adjustments to create a range where the ratio would be in line with that of other countries. If it were, the infant mortality of Cuba would be between 7.45 and 11.16 per 1,000 births rather than the 5.79 per 1,000 reported by the regime – as much as 92% higher. As a result, Cuba moves from having an average infant mortality rate in the PERISTAT data to having the worst average infant mortality in that dataset – above that of most European and North American countries.
https://notesonliberty.com/2016/11/30/on-cubas-fake-stats/
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/
Несложный анализ показал, что ВВП на 70% состоит из услуг, которые считаются в песо (то которое песо, а не чеки из берёзки для туристов, которые песо конвертируемое)... то есть какую экономику хочешь, такую и рисуешь.
Но в экономике, я разбираюсь чуть лучше, чем в медицине, а вот про медицину прочитал сегодня... как при помощи нехитрой статистики сделать "хорошую медицину на мировом уровне" и чудовищного говна.
As I mentioned on Monday, Cuban doctors face penalties for not meeting their “infant mortality” targets. As a result, they use extreme measures ranging from abortion against the mother’s will to sterilization and isolation. They also have an incentive to lie…(pretty obvious right?)
How can they lie? By re-categorizing early neonatal (from birth to 7th day) or neonatal deaths (up to 28th day) as late fetal deaths. Early neonatal deaths and late fetal deaths are basically grouped together at “perinatal” deaths since they share the same factors. Normally, health statistics suggest that late fetal deaths and early neonatal deaths should be heavily correlated (the graph below makes everything clearer). However late fetal deaths do not enter inside the infant mortality rates while the early neonatal deaths do enter that often-cited rate (see graph below).
Normally, the ratio of late fetal deaths to early neonatal deaths should be more or less constant across space. In the PERISTAT data (the one that best divides those deaths), most countries have a ratio of late fetal to early neonatal deaths ranging from 1.04 to 3.03. Cuba has a ratio of more than 6. This is pretty much a clear of data manipulation.
In a recent article published in Cuban Studies, Roberto Gonzales makes adjustments to create a range where the ratio would be in line with that of other countries. If it were, the infant mortality of Cuba would be between 7.45 and 11.16 per 1,000 births rather than the 5.79 per 1,000 reported by the regime – as much as 92% higher. As a result, Cuba moves from having an average infant mortality rate in the PERISTAT data to having the worst average infant mortality in that dataset – above that of most European and North American countries.
https://notesonliberty.com/2016/11/30/on-cubas-fake-stats/
