There is seemingly no end to the extent to which anti-gun people and groups will lie about guns and gun owners. Post links to articles by these masters of prevarication here.
Research published in a major medical journal concludes that a parachute is no more effective than an empty backpack at protecting you from harm if you have to jump from an aircraft.
But before you leap to any rash conclusions, you had better hear the whole story.
A little bit surprising that NPR published or posted this article.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016. NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
Thanks for this link. I will have to remember this story and send it to some friends who are doing research right now.
While it is not mentioned in the article the way I would say it, it does point out the problem with doctors using epidemiology research techniques for problems that are not epidemics (using epidemic in the medical sense). It is based on a drawn conclusion by people who have no expertise in the area. I would never dream of doing medical research based on my criminology expertise and I want them to stay out of my area. When I look at medical research, I can say (as one example) that cigarette smoking cannot possibly cause cancer because a larger portion of smokers than can be explained by natural immunity never get cancer.
That's old, but one of the best articles ever published because it points out some of our hypocrisy in touting evidence based medicine when we often do things based upon simple unquantified experience. There is also no study proving that ventilators save lives (though they obviously do), which is the point of this article.
BMJ publishes some tongue in cheek papers from time to time, and it's a refreshing dose of reality against a backdrop of "the newest, most expensive drug is 1% better".
Edit: this is a follow on to an old British Medical Journal paper with a fun twist. The old paper was mocking the fact that nobody would do this study.
I am not a medical researcher, but I don’t see anything wrong with the general methodology of epidemiological research. When it comes to guns, it’s a data problem, not a methodology problem.
The methodology is straightforward. You hypothesize that eating cheeseburgers causes heart disease. You randomly assign a sample of people into two groups. Group A eats cheeseburgers and Group B doesn’t. You sample the post-burger incidence of heart disease. You also measure a lot of controlling factors like the person’s weight, medical history, exercise habits, general eating habits, etc. You estimate a logistic regression that predicts the quantitative increase in the probability of heart disease based on eating cheeseburgers, all other f actors constant.
There’s no reason this can’t be similarly applied to the risk of bad outcomes from possessing firearms, provided data on the relevant controlling factors can be collected. But the problem is, how do you measure maturity, responsibility, common sense, good habits, etc. in addition to gun safety experience, knowledge, safe handling practices, etc. It would be an impossibly expensive effort to measure such qualities, hence it isn’t generally done.
So, when some medical researcher tries to infer something about my risk of accidents or death from my possession of firearms, I will discount their conclusions because they don’t know what really influences my behavior.
“Always liked me a sidearm with some heft.” Boss Spearman in Open Range.
There are far too many "studies" out there which are either financially or politically motivated. Then there are other studies which are "buried" because they show a result different that what the bosses wanted.
JOIN NRA TODAY!, NRA Benefactor Life, TSRA Defender Life, Gun Owners of America Life, SAF, FPC, VCDL Member
LTC/SSC Instructor, NRA Certified Instructor, CRSO
The last hope of human liberty in this world rests on us. -Thomas Jefferson
ninjabread wrote: ↑Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:33 pm
According to a recent study, AMA members kill more people in the USA than Al Qaeda members.
Got a citation to back that up?
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
And certainly, none of these so-called statistics could possibly be due to the fact that we are overrun with contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy? Oh wait, both of your citations were in fact published by just such ambulance chasing blood suckers. Whoopsy daisy!
I would advise you to avoid any and all medical care, way too risky. Better off to just die from a curable disease or injury. Oh, and don't even consider a striker fired handgun without an external safety and of course, stay home and off the roads.
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
And certainly, none of these so-called statistics could possibly be due to the fact that we are overrun with contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy? Oh wait, both of your citations were in fact published by just such ambulance chasing blood suckers. Whoopsy daisy!
I would advise you to avoid any and all medical care, way too risky. Better off to just die from a curable disease or injury. Oh, and don't even consider a striker fired handgun without an external safety and of course, stay home and off the roads.
I think you have stumbled upon the crux of the issue with a lot of studies related to "gun deaths", etc. Namely, that the only comparison that really matters is to look at the results that come from people choosing from various alternative options. In the case you are commenting on, it is somewhat meaningless to look at deaths that result from medical malpractice alone, as you rightly point out. That data point, alone, is useless to me when I am trying to decide on a course of action. Instead, I need to consider whether I am more or less likely to be better off after visiting a doctor than I would be if I did not visit that doctor. In most cases where I am suffering from a real illness or injury, I believe that I will be better off visiting a doctor, even with the possibility of medical malpractice, so I make an appointment, or show up at the emergency room, depending on the situation.
Similarly, with gun ownership, it is pointless and irrelevant to look solely at the number of deaths that involve a gun, or even at the number of documented unintentional gun deaths. While those might be interesting data points, they are useless to anyone in deciding whether that person will be more or less safe if they buy a gun. Solitary data points presented alone, and out of context to the larger issues / decisions at hand may be good for stirring up emotions, but that is all they are good for.
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
And certainly, none of these so-called statistics could possibly be due to the fact that we are overrun with contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy? Oh wait, both of your citations were in fact published by just such ambulance chasing blood suckers. Whoopsy daisy!
If you think the "contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy" are using inaccurate numbers, you could provide the correct numbers, with appropriate citation to back that up. Oh wait, instead of challenging the accuracy of the numbers, you resorted to ad hominem fallacy. Whoopsy daisy!
This is my opinion. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
And certainly, none of these so-called statistics could possibly be due to the fact that we are overrun with contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy? Oh wait, both of your citations were in fact published by just such ambulance chasing blood suckers. Whoopsy daisy!
If you think the "contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy" are using inaccurate numbers, you could provide the correct numbers, with appropriate citation to back that up. Oh wait, instead of challenging the accuracy of the numbers, you resorted to ad hominem fallacy. Whoopsy daisy!
So now you are defending contingency fee liability lawyers? Really? They are the ones guilty of malpractice. Your obvious need to justify a forgone conclusion with shameless self promoting marketing pieces speaks volumes. Find me a real fact based citation and then we can discuss.
"You may all go to H3ll, and I will go to Texas." - Davy Crockett
"Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." - Wyatt Earp
NRA Life Member
לעולם לא תשכח
A recent study by Johns Hopkins University analyzed eight years of data – which is equivalent to two presidential terms – to look into the problem of medical malpractice in the United States. Turns out, medical malpractice kills at least 250,000 Americans every year, which is a rather modest figure compared to other studies showing that medical malpractice deaths in the U.S. total more than 400,000 a year.
That is about 33,000 a year—which is a disgusting number by itself.
But preventable medical errors causing deaths? Almost 7x as many deaths! Approximately 250,00 confirmed fatalities due to preventable medical errors. And some researchers believe that number could be closer to 440,000.
And certainly, none of these so-called statistics could possibly be due to the fact that we are overrun with contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy? Oh wait, both of your citations were in fact published by just such ambulance chasing blood suckers. Whoopsy daisy!
If you think the "contingency fee liability lawyers just looking to strike it rich without regard to whose life or reputation they destroy" are using inaccurate numbers, you could provide the correct numbers, with appropriate citation to back that up. Oh wait, instead of challenging the accuracy of the numbers, you resorted to ad hominem fallacy. Whoopsy daisy!
So now you are defending contingency fee liability lawyers? Really? They are the ones guilty of malpractice. Your obvious need to justify a forgone conclusion with shameless self promoting marketing pieces speaks volumes. Find me a real fact based citation and then we can discuss.
If you are going to insult all plaintiff attorneys with this garbage, then bring some proof. Compare your unfounded opinion with my experience as medical malpractice defense attorney for over 20 of my 31 years as an attorney. I never lost a single medical trial, even those I should have lost. I settled many cases because they were too risky to take to trial, even when I knew juries look for ways to find doctors not negligent. In the vast majority of cases I handled, the doctor/hospital/nurse/CRNA/etc. did nothing wrong. However, I've seen astounding medical negligence that a first year resident would have recognized was a problem. I've seen routine minor procedures result in death or permanent serious injuries. If fact, I've seen so much in those 20+ years that I worry when a friend or relative goes in for minor procedures like an appendectomy.
Now, you show me the figures about medical malpractice are not accurate. Bring proof, not more insults and false bravado. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, don't insult a fellow member again.
Chas.