<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><span></span></div><div><span>On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 10:18 AM John Clark <<a href="mailto:johnkclark@gmail.com">johnkclark@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>> It is not as simple as saying the AVERAGE citizen lives longer</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>and on the surface it costs less, so it is an open and shut</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>case, single payer wins and is the reason they are living</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>longer. If you truly believe that, I guess I don't have much</span><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><span>else to say on the topic.></span><br></blockquote></blockquote><span></span><br><span>> I don't think anybody who valued the scientific method</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>more than they valued ANY political ideology would write</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>the above.</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>People who valued the scientific method wouldn't want to stop with a simple statistic wrenched from its context. As I asked before, you'd have to do a little more analysis, such as looking at historical rates of longevity. I haven't done the analysis, but you wouldn't want to bet people's lives on just taking a statistic out of context, would you? Have you also looked at nations that have shorter than the US life expectancy to see if they all don't have single payer systems?</span><br><span></span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>Sometimes a rational person must be ruthless, so I will show a</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>theory that doesn't fit the facts no mercy regardless of the</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>emotional attachment I may have for it. </span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Actually, have you ever worked in a lab or done any data analysis? If you have, then you know you have to be careful with drawing conclusions. There are things like sampling errors and experimental error. This is why when you run a test, you don't always assume something that doesn't fit a theory must needs refute that theory. (Sure, this leaves room for mischief -- such as someone saying it's an error in the data and not their pet theory when things go wrong, but it's by no means a simple matter, especially in complicated cases like this, to say X causes Y.)</span><br><span></span><br><span>I'd also be careful of accusing people of being emotionally attached or ideologically driven when they disagree with you. That rarely leads to a fruitful discussion. Instead, it just leads down the rabbit hole of accusations and counter-accusations.</span><br><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span><div style="line-height: normal;"><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Regards,</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="line-height: 20px; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Dan</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> Sample my Kindle books via:</span></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><font color="#000000" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><a href="http://author.to/DanUst" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">http://author.to/DanUst</a></font></div></div><div style="line-height: normal;"><br></div></div></div></body></html>