verteu

20 ms·

331.
by verteu 3y ago
> The biggest lie in crypto is that tokens are bought for utility and not speculative gains. I don't know if it's delusion or intentional deception. It's an attempt to avoid the scope of US securities law: https:/&#x
332.
by verteu 3y ago
Plenty were concerned about overpopulation in the 2000s, including Indian government. Hence, (eg) National Population Policy 2000.
333.
by verteu 3y ago
Keep in mind India's fertility rate was much higher at the time of the anecdote (~3.35 children/woman in 2000 vs 2.05 now).
334.
by verteu 3y ago
Requiring more education/outcome data to be public would help prevent this. If education researchers are forced to get data from California's Department of Education, there's tacit pressure to find results that make DoE look
335.
by verteu 3y ago
A minimum word limit on comments could help. I'd much prefer "in-depth and dismissive" comments over "brief and dismissive" ones.
336.
by verteu 3y ago
> I didn't even say anything controversial, a glance at the wikipedia page would list a bunch of criticism. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness#Concerns_and_criti Nothing in that Wiki link supports y
337.
by verteu 3y ago
Maybe Google (semi/permanently?) penalized your domain when spammers started using your GA4 tag?
338.
by verteu 3y ago
> PE can be replaced with "Some guys". PE bought your hospital? More like, "some guys" bought your hospital. The article is about how PE funds are large, and can thus buy enough businesses to reduce competition. Your
339.
by verteu 3y ago
"Private equity" refers to large investment funds that typically buy & restructure businesses to increase profitability. It's not simply a generic term for "a business."
340.
by verteu 3y ago
The Swiss system isn't quite lassiez-faire capitalist: > "The Swiss government... does keep down overall spending by regulating drug prices and fees for lab tests and medical devices > Swiss insurance companies [must] offer
341.
by verteu 3y ago
Yes, 20% of the cost "from heart disease, stroke, and diabetes", which is significantly less than 20% of the total. (The press release has less ambiguous wording: "18 percent of all heart disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes c
342.
by verteu 3y ago
Agreed! I only mentioned it because "curmudgeon" chose an ad-hominem argument in lieu of a concrete criticism of the methodology.
343.
by verteu 3y ago
> Those studies aren't similar in methodology or subject at all. They both used observational health data to create a causal conclusion on mortality. How is that not a similarity in methodology?
344.
by verteu 3y ago
Excellent point -- I'll look for a meta-analysis of the peer reviewed ressearch.
345.
by verteu 3y ago
This was a reply to cscurmudgeon's objection, not yours. (You can tell because my comment is a reply to his comment.)
346.
by verteu 3y ago
By this standard, should we not believe that smoking causes lung cancer? After all, a controlled experiment on humans has never been done.
347.
by verteu 3y ago
I'm quite familiar with causal analysis [1]. What are your qualifications in the field? The paper performs half a dozen standard robustness checks [2]. Which exactly do you believe are missing? Be specific, and include reasons why we
348.
by verteu 3y ago
> As they acknowledge, this factor is extremely difficult to isolate from demographics, geography, religion, etc. No? They used "a within-facility differences-in-differences design to address nonrandom targeting of facilities"
349.
by verteu 3y ago
Reminds me of "Does Private Equity Investment in Healthcare Benefit Patients?" [1]. > Our estimates show that PE ownership increases the short-term mortality of Medicare patients by 10%, implying 20,150 lives lost due to PE own
350.
by verteu 3y ago
This doesn't come close to supporting your claim that (most of?) the entire healthcare cost gap is due to subsidizing innovation, for the reasons I described in my other comment. (ie: Drugs are only ~10% of our healthcare costs.) Even
351.
by verteu 3y ago
> And [health care prices] all spirals out of control. But... they don't. Peer countries with gvt subsidized/socialized care spend less than the US (per procedure and in aggregate).
352.
by verteu 3y ago
This could only be true if the majority of the healthcare spending diff came from payments to pharma/health dev cos, right? Do you know whether that's the case? If we're paying more for nurse salaries, hospital administration
353.
by verteu 3y ago
I suspect GP is referring to the fact that the US has the one of the worst health outcomes per dollar spent vs peer countries [1] [2]. If "better health outcomes per dollar" is not "what you want" -- how come? [1] https
354.
by verteu 3y ago
I'm referring to the author of the article (not the paper), who included no such explanation.
355.
by verteu 3y ago
No -- from the paper: "we report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates." [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3593013.3594020
356.
by verteu 3y ago
I'd be interested to see the source. I found several studies by Phillip Atiba Goff that did NOT control for SES. (Easy to find a statistically significant result when you ignore confounding variables!) But none that did. [1] https:&#x
357.
by verteu 3y ago
You inferred wrong. From the paper: "we report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates." [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3593013.3594020
358.
by verteu 3y ago
You were misled. From the paper: "we report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates." [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3593013.3594020
359.
by verteu 3y ago
They have a much higher murder rate too. Murder is not caused by "cops observing crime."
360.
by verteu 3y ago
Unsheltered homeless count is up 65% since 2005 [1], and property crime has doubled since 2009 [2]. So there's a reason people think SF is going downhill. A 1991 paper [3] estimates homelessness at 535.1/100,000, about half the cu

More ›