Questioning the relevance of 5 yr survival rates

On 1 août, 19:32, Donna Evleth wrote:
From: Hacksaw
Organization:http://groups.google.com
Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 06:26:59 -0700
Subject: Questioning the relevance of 5 yr survival rates

On Aug 1, 7:06 am, "Planet Visitor II" wrote:
"Earl Evleth" wrote in
...
I brought this point up a while back since PV cited comparative
survival rates. This article explains the problem.

When one does that for breast cancer one finds that the
US and the EU15 have nearly the same mortality rates, currently
running in the range of 16-18/100,000 for breast cancer.
These mortality rates have been dropping, about 10 years
ago they were in the 18-20 region. However, Japan's rates
are below 10 and nobody is sure why.

What the hell are you raving about again, Earl? There is no
mention of the EU in your entire offering.

Read just above. I am talking about using the mortality rates
directly. 5 yr survival statistics are questionable as I also
showed. They were invented since most cancers remained
fatal at abut the same level and so they had to invent a
new statistic.

Years ago I had the same misconceptions you did by a colleague
pointed out the trickery behind the 5 yr survival stats. So I stood
corrected and am passing on the information to you.

This is a forgery. The header tells the whole story. Stephen Bach strikes
again.

Donna Evleth



- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -

- Afficher le texte des messages précédents -- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -

- Afficher le texte des messages précédents -

donna you're so sloshed you can't even read the address on the header