-
“And you must acknowledge that one study is less convincing than six that show the basic same thing. And you must also acknowledge that a smaller study has more room for variation than a larger one. If you can agree with that, we can move on.”
LisaRose,
More documented information is always more convincing that less documented information. In other words I’ve expressed this several times during this discussion. I haven’t changed my mind.
Adamah,
When composing my extrapolation I considered the issue of teens and a higher incidence ratio unrelated to refusal of blood product (e.g., Maori ethnicity).
Here’s why I opted not to mathematically account for the issue of teen deaths due to red cell transfusion refusal:
1. I don’t know that there is anything to account for because I don’t know that any of the teens are among the 21 deaths in the 103 JW patients.
2. I’m familiar with laws and customs related to refusal of treatment of a broad spectrum of healthcare service areas around the world. I disagree with you about the potential for inclusion of teens in Beliaev’s study by comparison for at least the following reasons: 1) In third-world areas refusal of blood transfusion by adults alone would more than offset the potential disparity you cite because these service areas are more dependant on red cell transfusion to treat anemia than in developed service areas. 2) In developed healthcare service areas (e.g., the USA) there is a medical ethics concept known as “mature minor”. Under this ethical legal construct doctors and institutions have allowed themselves to perform high risk procedures on minors who achieved a rather subjective competency threshold value and who refused blood. At the very least this would mitigate the effect you cite. 3) The advent of alternatives to red cell transfusion to treat anemia (particularly in the Hb range of =/<8 g dL to >7 g dL) further mitigates the effect of teen inclusion because the threshold value of Hb =/<8 g dL does not necessarily demand transfusion of red cells when alternative treatment is available. In many instances there is actually a good medical argument not to give red cell transfusion to treat anemia Hb =/>6-7 g dL. Hence had a JW teen with Hb =/>6-7 g dL not been treated with red cells transfusion it could easily be the case the transfusion was avoided because of implementing an alternative therapy that is arguably better and that this was done regardless of patient preference of no red cell transfusion. In other words, in these cases alternative treatment effectivly trumped the question of red cell transfusion or no red cell transfusion.
3. In addition to the preceding, there are additional deaths due to JWs refusing blood products other than red cells, and the Beliaev study examined outcomes related strictly to red cell transfusion. Alone this single factor would likely (if not surely) outweigh the effect you cite of teen inclusion, should it be real.
“Not only does the sample population have a higher rate of anemia, but you admit that in the sub-population it has a higher mortality rate if left untreated, and those two factors explain WHY the study is unfit for extrapolation purposes: it's not truly a representative sample of the entire population Worldwide.”
I do not compare results of the Beliaev study with the entire population worldwide.
I compare the result of the Beliaev study with the population of JWs worldwide.
JW make up the “the sample population” you speak of and the “sub-population” you speak of, and it's mortality among the JW population that is at issue.
If I’ve misunderstood you please feel free to restate yourself or otherwise clarify.
Marvin Shilmer