3 ms·
I had assumed "the MESA study population" was a particularly unhealthy bunch in terms of this measurement, meaning the 50th percentile puts one in the worst hal
by kqr 1y ago
I had assumed "the MESA study population" was a particularly unhealthy bunch in terms of this measurement, meaning the 50th percentile puts one in the worst half of an already bad off group.
- in_cahoots 1y agoI don't know the exact details, but I thought the Framingham survey was just a cross-section of the population. So getting upset about a 50th percentile score makes no sense at a population level. A quick Google says that the Mesa study was actually of people without cardiovascular disease at the beginning of the study. So again, these conclusions don't make any sense to me.
- wrs 1y agoOf course it makes sense. 30% of this population will die of heart disease. You don’t want to be at the median of that population if you can avoid it. And as a society we need to move the median, not just accept it. Which means giving people better advice based on better data.
- array_key_first 1y agoI mean, how many people have cardiovascular events? I don't actually know, but 50% sounds right.
- kingofmen 1y agoThat would make sense, but again, should be mentioned as context for why the number is bad. It's not as though we're skimping on wordcount here.