From: Chris Hibbert (hibbert@agorics.com)
Date: Tue Jul 07 1998 - 10:34:50 MDT
There are some very surprising numbers here. I'll have to look at the
study. As I read it, the entries in the table are 1 for a base rate,
with lower numbers providing lower mortality and higher numbers
higher. From the way Robin talked about it, the numbers are actually
ratios of mortality rates, so 1 vs. 3 is a factor of three (with 3
being worse) in how often people die, and similarly .33 and 1 is a
factor of three (with .33 being better). Presumably the numbers are
not comparable across the tables.
Look at the numbers for Drinking and for weight! Heavy drinkers and
overweight people have the lowest mortality! Underweight people and
teatotallers have higher mortality. That's directly contradictory to
all the reports we've been seeing which would lead us to believe that
underweight might be better than "normal" (i.e. average?), which
should be much better than overweight. Moderate drinking is supposed
to be better than teatotalling, which is much better than heavy
drinking. Can these numbers be right? Or am I misreading the whole
table?
I believe the numbers in all the other tables, but I didn't realize
being male was such a handicap.
Chris
Robin told us:
>> Here are the death rate ratio parameters from their model:
>>
>> Age 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+
>> 1.0 2.66 3.46 9.30 16.78 40.00
>> Sex Male Female
>> 1.0 .41
>> Race NonBlack Black
>> 1.0 1.19
>> Residence Rural Suburban City
>> 1.0 1.16 1.52
>> Education 16+yrs 12-15 0 -11
>> 1.0 .95 .90
>> Income 30K$+ 10-29K$ <10K$
>> 1.0 2.14 2.77
>> Smoking Never current former
>> 1.0 1.26 1.28
>> Alcohol drinks/mo. Moderate None Heavy
>> 1.0 1.13 .85
>> Body Mass Normal Underweight Overweight
>> 1.0 2.03 .94
>> Physical Activity Quintiles
>> 5(high) 4 3 2 1(low)
>> 1.0 1.46 1.60 2.25 2.91
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:18 MST