4 ms·

It's a bit concerning that it's labeled a paradox, as you only use that word if it's strongly counter intuitive. That implies everyone who uses that term expect

It's a bit concerning that it's labeled a paradox, as you only use that word if it's strongly counter intuitive. That implies everyone who uses that term expected Hispanics to not live longer. When you see that trend in the data surely you should say "that's interesting, I wonder if it's accurate and hence something to do with being Hispanic" rather than "By what devilry does my data suggest that Hispanics live longer?".

IkmoIkmo 12y ago
Not really concerning to me. For example, what if my data showed that less affluent people do better in school, or have better health, than more affluent people. Would that surprise you, and would a healthy response be to check your data again before chasing after this conclusion? I think generally, yes, because it conflicts with our notions (from earlier studies) about how socioeconomic status affects success in schools and in health. And that's likely at the core of the 'paradox', that hispanic communities are relatively less affluent than a median citizen, and that lower socioeconomic status is normally linked to negative, rather than positive, affects on health. The surprise isn't really concerning. I mean I get your point, it's important to remain open-minded and ask open-minded questions, as opposed to questions which carry lots of preconceived ideas about the world. But in this case it doesn't seem all that concerning to me.
- Tsggdjbs 12y ago
  The study controls for income, so in theory the effect of lower socioeconomic status is removed. It is effectively saying fewer Hispanic people at a certain income level will die relative to people of other races at the same income level. This is a paradox especially if your prior is that longevity and race should be unrelated.
  - colomon 12y ago
    "In the United States, Hispanics die at slower rates than non-Hispanic whites. This is true even before accounting for differences in incomes and health-care access, which put Hispanics at a disadvantage."
rayiner 12y ago
> That implies everyone who uses that term expected Hispanics to not live longer. That's a totally reasonable assumption given that we know: 1) Hispanics on average have lower SES; 2) longevity is correlated with SES.
coldtea 12y ago
>It's a bit concerning that it's labeled a paradox, as you only use that word if it's strongly counter intuitive. That implies everyone who uses that term expected Hispanics to not live longer. Considering that they live shorter in Mexico and Latin America, and that they are less afluent that the mean in the US, it makes sense to expect that.

IkmoIkmo 12y ago

Not really concerning to me. For example, what if my data showed that less affluent people do better in school, or have better health, than more affluent people. Would that surprise you, and would a healthy response be to check your data again before chasing after this conclusion? I think generally, yes, because it conflicts with our notions (from earlier studies) about how socioeconomic status affects success in schools and in health. And that's likely at the core of the 'paradox', that hispanic communities are relatively less affluent than a median citizen, and that lower socioeconomic status is normally linked to negative, rather than positive, affects on health. The surprise isn't really concerning. I mean I get your point, it's important to remain open-minded and ask open-minded questions, as opposed to questions which carry lots of preconceived ideas about the world. But in this case it doesn't seem all that concerning to me.

Tsggdjbs 12y ago
The study controls for income, so in theory the effect of lower socioeconomic status is removed. It is effectively saying fewer Hispanic people at a certain income level will die relative to people of other races at the same income level. This is a paradox especially if your prior is that longevity and race should be unrelated.
- colomon 12y ago
  "In the United States, Hispanics die at slower rates than non-Hispanic whites. This is true even before accounting for differences in incomes and health-care access, which put Hispanics at a disadvantage."

rayiner 12y ago

> That implies everyone who uses that term expected Hispanics to not live longer. That's a totally reasonable assumption given that we know: 1) Hispanics on average have lower SES; 2) longevity is correlated with SES.

coldtea 12y ago

>It's a bit concerning that it's labeled a paradox, as you only use that word if it's strongly counter intuitive. That implies everyone who uses that term expected Hispanics to not live longer. Considering that they live shorter in Mexico and Latin America, and that they are less afluent that the mean in the US, it makes sense to expect that.