So this was the elephant in the room
It's the cornerstone idea of the paper that lost schooling years can be directly translated into lost years of life. And it is wrong.
/15
-
-
So the whole thing is based not only on the falsely deterministic assumption but also a horribly overblown estimate of the key risk ratio. WTF
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
It also makes more sense given those confidence intervals. The original model they used is nearly 50% based on the two studies with the widest confidence bounds, with the more precise studies having a nearly 0% weighting!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If you increase age-specific mortality over all ages by 100% you don't get anything remotely close to half the life expectancy as deaths are distributed to older ages.
-
Yes, with my quick check for the US males 2017, if you increase mx by 100% the resulting life expectancy is 67.1 vs the original 76.3
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
/17
downright irresponsible
and, if heard and implemented, are
very dangerous
/20
asking opinion of meta- researchers
/22
how about giving everybody several more years of schooling and becoming immortal? or do people without education just die right away?
]
/7