The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out


  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
    • Editorials
    • Commentary
    • Columns
    • Water Cooler
    • Letters
    • Cartoons
    • Books
  • Sports
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Communities
  • Rebate Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Photos
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • TWT BLOGS: Latest
  • Staff blogs
  • Create a blog

'Junk science' expert sounds alarm on insurance study

By Amanda Carpenter on Sept. 17, 2009 into Hot Button Blog

  • Subscribe

Steve Milloy’s "junk science" detector started running high when he got hold of a new study in the American Journal of Public Health claiming nearly 45,000 Americans die from a lack of health insurance.

According to the study, titled "Health Insurance and Mortality in U.S. Adults," working-age Americans without insurance have a 40 percent higher risk of death than their privately insured counterparts. It also includes a chart showing how many people have died state by state, supposedly because of lack of insurance. For example, researchers say 4,675 Texas have died because they didn’t have insurance during their study period.

Mr. Milloy, founder and publisher of Junkscience.com and co-founder and portfolio manger for the Free Enterprise Fund, said the study was created to boost President Obama’s health care agenda. Mr. Milloy reminded that Mr. Obama recently told Congress people would die if they didn’t have insurance.

"Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing," Mr. Obama said in his Sept. 9 address. "Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true."

Mr. Milloy believes the study will give Mr. Obama more specific numbers to use in order to ramp up public support for his plan.

"They are trying to create these factoids that they can beat opponents over the head with," Mr. Milloy said. "They interviewed 9,000 people between 1988 and 1994 and asked, 'Do you have health insurance?' and if you die at some point in the future, they assume your death was caused by the fact you didn’t have insurance during that time you were interviewed."

"That kind of stuff is classic junk science," Mr. Milloy added.

John C. Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis, agreed that the study was flawed. “The subjects were interviewed only once and the study tries to link their insurance status at that time to mortality a decade later. Yet over the period, the authors have no idea whether subjects were insured or uninsured, what kind of medical care they received, or even cause of death,” he said in a statement.

NPCA noted that a “more careful study” completed by the Congressional Budget Office found that low-income people without insurance had a 3 percent higher chance of death, but found no difference among higher income earners.

One of the study’s co-authors, Dr. David Himmelstein, is a strong proponent of a single-payer system. In addition to working as associate professor of medicine at Harvard University, Dr. Himmelstein is also founder and spokesman for Physicians for a National Health Program.

He testified before Congress earlier this year in favor of a single-payer system, saying, "Our 16,000 physician members support nonprofit, single-payer national health insurance because of overwhelming evidence that lesser reforms will fail." His health care advocacy work was not disclosed in a press release for this study.

Rather, remarks attributed to Dr. Himmelstein contained another shocking statistic. "The Institute of Medicine, using older studies, estimated that one American dies every 30 minutes from lack of health insurance," Dr. Himmelstein said. "Even this grim figure is an underestimate -- now one dies every 12 minutes."

  • Bookmark and Share
  • Comment

There are 6 Comments

keepdad

I'll wager you can comb the official death records of every jurisdiction in America and you won't find "Cause of Death: No Health Insurance."
Mark as offensive

bowzer

manufactured numbers based on erroneous assumptoins.. Its the whole basis for this massive reform
Mark as offensive

jonthaler

Milloy says: "They interviewed 9,000 people between 1988 and 1994 and asked, 'Do you have health insurance?' and if you die at some point in the future, they assume your death was caused by the fact you didn’t have insurance during that time you were interviewed." This statement is completely bogus. The study's authors used standard statistical techniques to correlate lack of insurance with increased death rate. They do not attribute any specific person's death to lack of insurance. One can criticize the study, but Milloy's complaint betrays his ignorance.
Mark as offensive

ggsully

jonthaler, you make Milloy's case for him by your statement. I have never herd of this website and if you go through the tutorial it explains why statics is not science and when it is played off as science is considered junk science. I found it very insightful.
Mark as offensive

jonthaler

ggsully, Statistical data analysis is used in *every* scientific experiment I know of. (Well, maybe not *every*, but *most* ;). Rejection of this analysis without some credible reason is irrational.
Mark as offensive

Cobra

jonthaler, did the authoers of the study use statistics on only those people who had no insurance at the time of death, or did they use statics that included people that had no insurance at one time and later died without determining whether those people had insurance at the time of death? Milloy claims that the authors didn't exclude people who actually had insurance at the time of death and that this would slew the results (which I can understand). You offer no evidence that Milloy is incorrect in his assessment.
Mark as offensive

Please login or register to post a comment

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.