3 ms·

A related effect is there is a real tendency in online debates to use countries that speak exotic foreign languages as examples. So there is no way of working o

by roenxi 2y ago

A related effect is there is a real tendency in online debates to use countries that speak exotic foreign languages as examples. So there is no way of working out what the data actually represents, what the known strengths and weaknesses are or what they are trying to measure. Or what the legal framework is.

complex1314 2y ago
Most statistical data in Norway is also available in English: https://www.ssb.no/en https://www.ssb.no/en
- roenxi 2y ago
  I got a great laugh out of that, they've done an impressive job anglicising their website. But it doesn't really change the fundamental point. It doesn't take long to get to "Most of the content here is only available in Norwegian" [0]. And the articles on the Norwegen version of the site seem to be different to the English. It can take a surprising amount of research sifting through who-knows-what to figure things out. One fun introductory challenge I recommend is figuring out what the components of the inflation index actually are; it usually takes a few rounds of sleuthing unless you have a muscle memory of where the right manual is. It is hard enough in the same language and with a familiar government. It isn't easy to do in a foreign language and unfamiliar government. [0] https://www.ssb.no/en/innrapportering https://www.ssb.no/en/innrapportering
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > It isn't easy to do in a foreign language and unfamiliar government The IMF does this.
  - complex1314 2y ago
    If your're most interested in blog posts google translate is great for exotic languages. But for the data they're all there in English [0]. And if you're after methodology, analysis or understanding medical data, they follow WHO standards and publications are all in English on pubmed.gov [1] for the explicit purpose of international collaboration (which is the norm in medicine and public health for most developed nations). [0] https://www.ssb.no/a/en/histstat/ https://www.ssb.no/a/en/histstat/ [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24780982/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24780982/
    - roenxi 2y ago
      I applaud the enthusiasm but I'm not that interested in Norway's medical system. I'm making a point about the larger issue of using foreign data. I spend a lot of time arguing with people on the internet for fun and education; and it is extremely common to get a cheerful comment which - after a few hours of investigation - appears to be an incorrect interpretation of data. It is hard enough to do for systems that are part of the English speaking world or big, easy to track metrics. It is substantially harder to do for fiddly data series from foreign systems where the primary source material is in a different language. > And if you're after methodology, analysis or understanding medical data, they follow WHO standards and publications are all in English on pubmed.gov This goes to the main point - if it turns out that they don't follow WHO standards in an area or there is critical data not on pubmed.gov, what is the expected path for finding that out? Because in English I have a much better chance of being able to figure that out. The countries are familiar and there is a better chance that the criticisms of the major institutions are well known. In a Norwegian context that already rather challenging task is even harder. EDIT An example occurs to me a few minutes later; there was an interesting theory that Japan had a lot of old people because there were unusually strong pension & tax incentives to lie about elderly relatives being alive when they were in fact dead. The Japanese stats office could be following WHO standards and publishing all their information on pubmed.gov and the series would still be incomparable with other countries if there is an unusual incentive for the stats to deceive coming form an unexpected angle. Keeping on top of that sort of thing in foreign legal systems is simply hard.
      - complex1314 2y ago
        For the point of arguing with strangers, yes, I agree that neither PubMed nor any other entities will provide you with what you need. I don't think that it is possible to acquire an understanding of an issue without some domain knowledge, at least on how to get the data. But to gain a deeper understanding of the flaws of any country's health (or any) system, there is no way around that except by comparing it with data from other countries. And that might be hard, which is why professionals spend a lot of time on it.
calgoo 2y ago
Are saying that Norway speak an exotic foreign language, so we should ignore their results because some people feel that we cant trust their information? Does that mean that we should not compare the US system to these other nations? Who can we compare it to in that case, UK, Australia and New Zealand?
- roenxi 2y ago
  You can make judgements on uncertain data. It is a reasonable thing to do. It just happens that, given the number of people who muck up data that should be familiar to them, I say there is a lot of misplaced confidence in how well people understand other countries - confidence that often grows because the average person has very limited material to cross-reference with because they can't read a lot of publicly available stuff.
- blitzar 2y ago
  > Who can we compare it to in that case, UK, Australia and New Zealand? Australia and New Zealand live upside down, you can not trust any of their data.
complex1314 2y ago
And google translate can help with exotic languages, here's an in depth on methodology: https://www-ssb-no.translate.goog/helse/artikler-og-publikasjoner/hvor-mange-kvinner-dor-i-svangerskap?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=no&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-ssb-no.translate.goog/helse/artikler-og-publikas...
- roenxi 2y ago
  I don't think that is an in-depth on methodology, they seem to be talking about how the WHO does things. And that doesn't seem to translate the graphs. But regardless, the bigger point is that the default position isn't that Stats Norway data is automatically comparable with everyone else's data. The world is large and complicated; it is quite easy for small details between systems to do surprising things.
pjc50 2y ago
> exotic foreign languages > Norwegian Come on, it's in the same writing system, runs through google translate, and there are plenty of English speaking Norwegians.
- soco 2y ago
  Nah don't bother - if one's only argument is that the US is The Incomparable Outlier, no logic will ever help.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    Yeah this roenxi user is one of the most talented mental gymnasts on HN. In past arguments I have been honestly suspicious that I was taken in by a performance artist.
    - roenxi 2y ago
      I thought you'd made a bad point. Is that so hard to believe?
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        Oh no, I have no problem with that. The repeated (willful?) misreading was the confusing bit.
bloqs 2y ago
Apart from the bit where Norwegians speak better English than Brits and Americans
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
oblio 2y ago
Yeah, Norway is conspiring to dethrone the mighty US through crooked statistics, we all know that Norwegians are infamous scoundrels! :-D
rightbyte 2y ago
Norwegian and English is even in the same language group.

by roenxi 2y ago

complex1314 2y ago

Most statistical data in Norway is also available in English: https://www.ssb.no/en https://www.ssb.no/en

roenxi 2y ago
I got a great laugh out of that, they've done an impressive job anglicising their website. But it doesn't really change the fundamental point. It doesn't take long to get to "Most of the content here is only available in Norwegian" [0]. And the articles on the Norwegen version of the site seem to be different to the English. It can take a surprising amount of research sifting through who-knows-what to figure things out. One fun introductory challenge I recommend is figuring out what the components of the inflation index actually are; it usually takes a few rounds of sleuthing unless you have a muscle memory of where the right manual is. It is hard enough in the same language and with a familiar government. It isn't easy to do in a foreign language and unfamiliar government. [0] https://www.ssb.no/en/innrapportering https://www.ssb.no/en/innrapportering
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > It isn't easy to do in a foreign language and unfamiliar government The IMF does this.
- complex1314 2y ago
  If your're most interested in blog posts google translate is great for exotic languages. But for the data they're all there in English [0]. And if you're after methodology, analysis or understanding medical data, they follow WHO standards and publications are all in English on pubmed.gov [1] for the explicit purpose of international collaboration (which is the norm in medicine and public health for most developed nations). [0] https://www.ssb.no/a/en/histstat/ https://www.ssb.no/a/en/histstat/ [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24780982/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24780982/
  - roenxi 2y ago
    I applaud the enthusiasm but I'm not that interested in Norway's medical system. I'm making a point about the larger issue of using foreign data. I spend a lot of time arguing with people on the internet for fun and education; and it is extremely common to get a cheerful comment which - after a few hours of investigation - appears to be an incorrect interpretation of data. It is hard enough to do for systems that are part of the English speaking world or big, easy to track metrics. It is substantially harder to do for fiddly data series from foreign systems where the primary source material is in a different language. > And if you're after methodology, analysis or understanding medical data, they follow WHO standards and publications are all in English on pubmed.gov This goes to the main point - if it turns out that they don't follow WHO standards in an area or there is critical data not on pubmed.gov, what is the expected path for finding that out? Because in English I have a much better chance of being able to figure that out. The countries are familiar and there is a better chance that the criticisms of the major institutions are well known. In a Norwegian context that already rather challenging task is even harder. EDIT An example occurs to me a few minutes later; there was an interesting theory that Japan had a lot of old people because there were unusually strong pension & tax incentives to lie about elderly relatives being alive when they were in fact dead. The Japanese stats office could be following WHO standards and publishing all their information on pubmed.gov and the series would still be incomparable with other countries if there is an unusual incentive for the stats to deceive coming form an unexpected angle. Keeping on top of that sort of thing in foreign legal systems is simply hard.
    - complex1314 2y ago
      For the point of arguing with strangers, yes, I agree that neither PubMed nor any other entities will provide you with what you need. I don't think that it is possible to acquire an understanding of an issue without some domain knowledge, at least on how to get the data. But to gain a deeper understanding of the flaws of any country's health (or any) system, there is no way around that except by comparing it with data from other countries. And that might be hard, which is why professionals spend a lot of time on it.

calgoo 2y ago

Are saying that Norway speak an exotic foreign language, so we should ignore their results because some people feel that we cant trust their information? Does that mean that we should not compare the US system to these other nations? Who can we compare it to in that case, UK, Australia and New Zealand?

roenxi 2y ago
You can make judgements on uncertain data. It is a reasonable thing to do. It just happens that, given the number of people who muck up data that should be familiar to them, I say there is a lot of misplaced confidence in how well people understand other countries - confidence that often grows because the average person has very limited material to cross-reference with because they can't read a lot of publicly available stuff.
blitzar 2y ago
> Who can we compare it to in that case, UK, Australia and New Zealand? Australia and New Zealand live upside down, you can not trust any of their data.

complex1314 2y ago

And google translate can help with exotic languages, here's an in depth on methodology: https://www-ssb-no.translate.goog/helse/artikler-og-publikasjoner/hvor-mange-kvinner-dor-i-svangerskap?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=no&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-ssb-no.translate.goog/helse/artikler-og-publikas...

roenxi 2y ago
I don't think that is an in-depth on methodology, they seem to be talking about how the WHO does things. And that doesn't seem to translate the graphs. But regardless, the bigger point is that the default position isn't that Stats Norway data is automatically comparable with everyone else's data. The world is large and complicated; it is quite easy for small details between systems to do surprising things.

pjc50 2y ago

> exotic foreign languages > Norwegian Come on, it's in the same writing system, runs through google translate, and there are plenty of English speaking Norwegians.

soco 2y ago
Nah don't bother - if one's only argument is that the US is The Incomparable Outlier, no logic will ever help.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Yeah this roenxi user is one of the most talented mental gymnasts on HN. In past arguments I have been honestly suspicious that I was taken in by a performance artist.
  - roenxi 2y ago
    I thought you'd made a bad point. Is that so hard to believe?
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      Oh no, I have no problem with that. The repeated (willful?) misreading was the confusing bit.

bloqs 2y ago

Apart from the bit where Norwegians speak better English than Brits and Americans

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

oblio 2y ago

Yeah, Norway is conspiring to dethrone the mighty US through crooked statistics, we all know that Norwegians are infamous scoundrels! :-D

rightbyte 2y ago

Norwegian and English is even in the same language group.