Tapate50
Well-known member
Everyone was right. she is a C u next Tuesday
Sometimes people don’t like to hear that
TLHLIM
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
Sometimes people don’t like to hear that
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
Another way of treating that suffering would be medical care, but that’s expensive. And has a long waitlist. Grandmother is in lots of pain, let’s get her an appointment for pain medication. Sorry the next available appointment is 6 months from now, but we’ll have an assisted suicide consultant visit you tomorrow.
This is freaking monstrous.
sturg33
I
Which pilicy is driving those outcomes
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Just to cite one small example. There was a study a few years ago of the counties where Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York meet. Sociologically similar counties which allows for control of potentially confounding factors. Decades ago they all had the same lung cancer rate. NY took an aggressive approach in educating its people about tobacco and lung cancer. Ohio took a laissez-faire approach. And PA took an approach in between the two others. Fast forward a few decades and I'll let you guess what the outcomes are for lung cancer in those counties by state.
More recently we have had a situation where under the ACA states have been given a chance to expand Medicaid coverage. Most chose to opt in. Some did not. I'll let you guess what the outcomes have been in terms of how that choice has affected health outcomes in the states that opted in relative to those that opted out.
Life is precious. I hope those states that are not performing well on life (both quantity and quality) will try to learn from those that are doing better.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
income differences is a variable that is controlled for by selecting a group of counties that are similar in demographic and socioeconomic terms
income is not the factor that drove the divergent outcomes in lung cancer rates in those counties...policy did...i know that doesn't suit your ideological predilections so I don't expect you to accept it
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
but income differences HAVE been growing between blue and red states and do probably account for some of the relative outperformance of blue states in some areas of health
i guess red states just got unlucky there in being relatively poor and getting poorer ever decade for the past five decades
i guess red states just got unlucky there in being relatively poor and getting poorer ever decade for the past five decades
sturg33
I
Post the study.
I agree that creating more of a nanny state and restricting liberty may lead to more days alive
what about better doctors residing in NY?
Last edited:
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
that's exactly right...the NY approach is more paternalistic and the Ohio approach is more libertarian
your preference for the Ohio approach is an example of what i was talking about...ideology trumping life...you like to go around saying you are on the side of life...but only when ideologically convenient
sturg33
I
Sure. Then lets be consistent and add in abortion statistics to the averages
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
The differences in state policies directly correlate to those years lost, said Jennifer Karas Montez, director of the Center for Aging and Policy Studies at Syracuse University and author of several papers that describe the connection between politics and life expectancy.
Ohio sticks out — for all the wrong reasons. Roughly 1 in 5 Ohioans will die before they turn 65, according to Montez’s analysis using the state’s 2019 death rates. The state, whose legislature has been increasingly dominated by Republicans, has plummeted nationally when it comes to life expectancy rates, moving from middle of the pack to the bottom fifth of states during the last 50 years, The Post found. Ohioans have a similar life expectancy to residents of Slovakia and Ecuador, relatively poor countries.
Thirty years ago, Ohio’s health outcomes were on par with California’s, with nearly identical death rates for adults in the prime of life — ranking in the middle among the 50 states. But the two states’ outcomes have diverged, along with their political leanings, said Ellen Meara, a health economics and policy professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. She has studied why death rates fell in California, home to some of the nation’s most progressive politics, while they scarcely budged in increasingly conservative Ohio. By 2017, California had the nation’s second-lowest mortality rates, falling behind only Minnesota; Ohio ranked 41st, according to The Post analysis.
Health disparities also show up unevenly across Ohio. The gleaming towers of the Cleveland Clinic, acclaimed as one of the world’s top hospitals, stand an hour away from Ashtabula, where the average life expectancy in 2018 was 75.1 years — nearly two years lower than the state of Ohio’s average and more than 3½ years shorter than the country’s average.
“We have some of the most celebrated health-care institutions not only in the nation, but in the world,” said Dan Skinner, an associate professor of health policy at Ohio University. “And yet it’s not the difference maker in our health.”
Many of the state’s public health outcomes are a direct result of political decisions, Skinner and other experts say, pointing to differences in Medicaid and safety net funding, as well as tobacco taxes and highway safety laws between Ohio and its neighbors. They note that Republicans’ stranglehold on the legislature, after defying repeated court orders to redraw state voting maps, has protected those politicians from the consequences of their votes.
For example, the Ohio State Highway Patrol said about 500 people lose their lives every year in car accidents in which those killed were not wearing seat belts, a problem that has outraged groups such as the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety as well as the 76-year-old governor, who has spent decades pushing to improve motor vehicle safety. DeWine lost his 22-year-old daughter, Becky, to a car accident in 1993.
“Our job, it seems to me, is to do everything we can to spare families the tragedy of losing someone, losing a child, losing a loved one,” DeWine said.
But House Republicans in April blocked DeWine’s proposal to allow police officers to pull over cars when they see drivers or their passengers not wearing seat belts. In contrast, New York in 1984 became the first state to enact such a law, followed by 34 others.
Ohio sticks out — for all the wrong reasons. Roughly 1 in 5 Ohioans will die before they turn 65, according to Montez’s analysis using the state’s 2019 death rates. The state, whose legislature has been increasingly dominated by Republicans, has plummeted nationally when it comes to life expectancy rates, moving from middle of the pack to the bottom fifth of states during the last 50 years, The Post found. Ohioans have a similar life expectancy to residents of Slovakia and Ecuador, relatively poor countries.
Thirty years ago, Ohio’s health outcomes were on par with California’s, with nearly identical death rates for adults in the prime of life — ranking in the middle among the 50 states. But the two states’ outcomes have diverged, along with their political leanings, said Ellen Meara, a health economics and policy professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. She has studied why death rates fell in California, home to some of the nation’s most progressive politics, while they scarcely budged in increasingly conservative Ohio. By 2017, California had the nation’s second-lowest mortality rates, falling behind only Minnesota; Ohio ranked 41st, according to The Post analysis.
Health disparities also show up unevenly across Ohio. The gleaming towers of the Cleveland Clinic, acclaimed as one of the world’s top hospitals, stand an hour away from Ashtabula, where the average life expectancy in 2018 was 75.1 years — nearly two years lower than the state of Ohio’s average and more than 3½ years shorter than the country’s average.
“We have some of the most celebrated health-care institutions not only in the nation, but in the world,” said Dan Skinner, an associate professor of health policy at Ohio University. “And yet it’s not the difference maker in our health.”
Many of the state’s public health outcomes are a direct result of political decisions, Skinner and other experts say, pointing to differences in Medicaid and safety net funding, as well as tobacco taxes and highway safety laws between Ohio and its neighbors. They note that Republicans’ stranglehold on the legislature, after defying repeated court orders to redraw state voting maps, has protected those politicians from the consequences of their votes.
For example, the Ohio State Highway Patrol said about 500 people lose their lives every year in car accidents in which those killed were not wearing seat belts, a problem that has outraged groups such as the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety as well as the 76-year-old governor, who has spent decades pushing to improve motor vehicle safety. DeWine lost his 22-year-old daughter, Becky, to a car accident in 1993.
“Our job, it seems to me, is to do everything we can to spare families the tragedy of losing someone, losing a child, losing a loved one,” DeWine said.
But House Republicans in April blocked DeWine’s proposal to allow police officers to pull over cars when they see drivers or their passengers not wearing seat belts. In contrast, New York in 1984 became the first state to enact such a law, followed by 34 others.
sturg33
I
1. That looks like an editorial. Where is the actual study? All that article is saying x is due to policies, but gives no specifics
2. Ohio has seat belt laws. What is they are supposed to do? Or, said differently, what about California's seat belt laws are leading to less deaths?
3. Add the abortion numbers
2. Ohio has seat belt laws. What is they are supposed to do? Or, said differently, what about California's seat belt laws are leading to less deaths?
3. Add the abortion numbers
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
To explain why state differences in mortality have become more aligned with state-level variables like income after about 1990, we instead hypothesize that in the middle of the 20th century, social structures in low-income states provided more safeguards against adverse health outcomes. Perhaps more importantly, during this period there may have been more opportunities for risky behavior in high-income states. Black et al. (2015) show that African-Americans who migrated from the Deep South during the Great Migration experienced higher levels of mortality than those who stayed home, conditional on their initial health statuses. Although migrants may have had higher incomes in the North, “beneficial health benefits due to economic and social improvement were apparently swamped by other forces, such as changes in behavioral patterns that were detrimental to long-term health, including higher propensities to smoke and consume alcohol” (p. 501).8 By the late 20th century, however, high-income states were more likely to enact health investments that over the next quarter-century resulted in more effective safety nets, more rapid diffusion of effective pharmaceutical treatments, a reduction in smoking, and a consequent decline in all-cause mortality (Montez et al. 2019, 2020; Miller and Wherry 2019; Buxbaum et al. 2020).
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
The hypothesis that investments related to Medicaid matter for the evolution of mortality has empirical support. Several authors, drawing upon different time periods and settings, show important evidence of plausibly causal reductions in mortality and morbidity linked to state differences in Medicaid policies. Owing to Medicaid eligibility’s link with Aid to Families with Dependent Children, a program dating to 1935 (and commonly referred to as “welfare”), there was substantial crossstate variation in the shares of newborns eligible for Medicaid. Using that variation, Goodman-Bacon (2018) estimates that infant mortality fell for newborn cohorts after Medicaid’s implementation in the 1960s and 1970s, and it did so in states with higher rates of eligibility for Medicaid. In the aggregate, nonwhite infant mortality fell by 11 percent in relation to Medicaid’s implementation, and it did so for the causes of death amenable to medical intervention at that time (Goodman-Bacon 2018). Later expansions of Medicaid (in the late 1980s and early 1990s) to pregnant women and newborns with slightly higher incomes also coincided with reductions in infant mortality (Currie and Gruber 1996). States that expanded eligibility for Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act saw declines in mortality and morbidity among near-elderly adults (Miller, Johnson, and Wherry 2021).
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Even more important for the time period we study, the implementation of Medicaid and its later expansions to pregnant low-income women have been linked to lower morbidity and mortality in the long run (Goodman-Bacon 2021; Miller and Wherry 2019). Again, using state variation in eligibility for Medicaid when first implemented due to its link to state participation in the Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Goodman-Bacon (2021) estimates: “Medicaid added 10 million quality adjusted life-years for cohorts born between 1955 and 1975 and saved the government more than twice its original cost” (p. 2588). This latter point is important since states share up to half the Medicaid program costs, so spending more crowds out other beneficial state spending. Later Medicaid expansions of the 1990s also had lasting effects, with infants whose mothers gained Medicaid coverage in the early 1990s experiencing lower rates of chronic conditions or hospitalizations for diabetes and obesity in adulthood (Miller and Wherry 2019).
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Other health programs targeting low-income populations matter for the evolution of long-term health, too. Using variation in the opening of Community Health Centers in the 1960s and 1970s (designed to care for medically under-served populations), Bailey and Goodman-Bacon (2015) showed that age-adjusted mortality rates had declined by an additional 2 percent in counties that opened Community Health Centers compared to those that did not. Further, the mortality decline was driven by deaths to adults over age 50. This pattern we see is also consistent with the hypothesis suggested by Case and Deaton (2017) that cohorts entering the workforce in the 1970s and 1980s experienced a changed economic landscape, one which shifted particularly against people without college degrees.