3 ms·

When you see articles on where to move or where to retire, statistics on life expectancy are sometimes shown. I wonder how much causality there is. Life expecta

When you see articles on where to move or where to retire, statistics on life expectancy are sometimes shown. I wonder how much causality there is. Life expectancy differs by race and education, and states differ in racial makeup and average educational level, but obviously your own demographics don't change when you move. So I doubt my life expectancy would change much if I move to Mississippi.

wolverine876 5y ago
> Life expectancy differs by race Are you implying direct causality there? Do you have evidence of causality? Race does affect access to the things that result in greater life expectancy, such as healthcare, money, and education. You may not intend it this way, but the claim is similar to a well-used bit of prejudiced sophistry which turns causality on its head: They say, 'X doesn't have greater life expectancy because of minorities' (again, not your words). That's ambiguous about the causality (as sophistry would be), but let's unpack it: It implies that minorities have worse health, pulling down the average, which implies that being a member of a 'minority' (a term without physiological basis or even clear definition) somehow causes you to have worse health. The reality is that being a member of a minority reduces your access, in our society, to the things that provide good health (see above). > states differ in racial makeup and average educational level Are you implying that 1) there is a correlation in the data between those factors and life expectancy, and 2) those (or even other demographics) are the only or primary factors (and aren't we forgetting likely the leading demographic factor, wealth)? I would have to see some data for the first; I don't see it based on my rough knowledge of state demographics. Also I strongly doubt #2: For example of another factor, many top-of-the-list states have long invested more in the health and education of their citizens (as the critics of such policies will agree - they continually criticize taxpayers in those states for funding such things, mocking the tax rates and all government programs). To try an example that maybe we can cite without research, remember the Affordable Care Act ('Obamacare'): IIRC many bottom-of-the-list states minimized their participation in it (while those at the top participated without hesitation), and their elected officials worked to disable it at all levels. Not only does that reduce available health care, but arguably it reflects that health care is a lower priority in those states, which may reduce healthcare's availability in many ways. Coronavirus response was similar: Which states had support for measures to protect health (though the data in the is pre-pandemic)? In fact, arguably there is a strong correlation between the political party controlling state government and life expectancy. That could be expected because the conservative party spends less on health care, education and other social needs, a policy they prioritize and loudly advocate. And that would undermine causality between minorities, who overwhelmingly vote for the liberal party, and reduced life expectancy. > I doubt my life expectancy would change much if I move to Mississippi. It may depend on your use of government services, which in part depends on how much wealth you have. Mississippi is a much different place than Boston. Also, even with wealth, in Boston, you have access to the best hospitals and doctors in the world - not coincidentally in a place that values healthcare and education highly.

wolverine876 5y ago

> Life expectancy differs by race Are you implying direct causality there? Do you have evidence of causality? Race does affect access to the things that result in greater life expectancy, such as healthcare, money, and education. You may not intend it this way, but the claim is similar to a well-used bit of prejudiced sophistry which turns causality on its head: They say, 'X doesn't have greater life expectancy because of minorities' (again, not your words). That's ambiguous about the causality (as sophistry would be), but let's unpack it: It implies that minorities have worse health, pulling down the average, which implies that being a member of a 'minority' (a term without physiological basis or even clear definition) somehow causes you to have worse health. The reality is that being a member of a minority reduces your access, in our society, to the things that provide good health (see above). > states differ in racial makeup and average educational level Are you implying that 1) there is a correlation in the data between those factors and life expectancy, and 2) those (or even other demographics) are the only or primary factors (and aren't we forgetting likely the leading demographic factor, wealth)? I would have to see some data for the first; I don't see it based on my rough knowledge of state demographics. Also I strongly doubt #2: For example of another factor, many top-of-the-list states have long invested more in the health and education of their citizens (as the critics of such policies will agree - they continually criticize taxpayers in those states for funding such things, mocking the tax rates and all government programs). To try an example that maybe we can cite without research, remember the Affordable Care Act ('Obamacare'): IIRC many bottom-of-the-list states minimized their participation in it (while those at the top participated without hesitation), and their elected officials worked to disable it at all levels. Not only does that reduce available health care, but arguably it reflects that health care is a lower priority in those states, which may reduce healthcare's availability in many ways. Coronavirus response was similar: Which states had support for measures to protect health (though the data in the is pre-pandemic)? In fact, arguably there is a strong correlation between the political party controlling state government and life expectancy. That could be expected because the conservative party spends less on health care, education and other social needs, a policy they prioritize and loudly advocate. And that would undermine causality between minorities, who overwhelmingly vote for the liberal party, and reduced life expectancy. > I doubt my life expectancy would change much if I move to Mississippi. It may depend on your use of government services, which in part depends on how much wealth you have. Mississippi is a much different place than Boston. Also, even with wealth, in Boston, you have access to the best hospitals and doctors in the world - not coincidentally in a place that values healthcare and education highly.