Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
[flagged] The Gender Gap in Heart Disease (quillette.com)
18 points by tomohawk on June 15, 2019 | hide | past | favorite | 9 comments



Heart disease is mostly an age related disease. As we can't yet cure it, what matters more is when people die.

There's a real gender gap between sexes, but it's because men don't pay enough attention to their health in general.

I think it's easier to cure the diseases themselves (however hard problem it is) than to change the behavior of men though.


Can we keep crap like quillette off this site?


It's downweighted like most politicized sites. But what matters on HN is article quality. If an article is substantive and interesting, and there's a hope that it can be discussed thoughtfully, it doesn't matter what site it comes from. I haven't looked at this article, but that's the reason the site isn't banned. The same is true for sites with the opposite politics.


quilette is flamebait bullshit. Anything potentially interesting is hard to get at because it's buried in fucking nonsense.

This particular article is a vicious version of a middle brow dismissal: all these other organisations are wrong, and here's my shitty excel plot to prove it.


Did you see anything actually wrong in the analysis? That table of death rates by age group certainly brings to mind something like Simpson's Paradox [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox


He starts by saying Go Red for Women claimed that _heart disease_ kills more women than men - they haven't made that claim.

He links a chart that talks about CVD, but uses that to talk about misleading stats for heart disease. CVD includes stroke, and stroke kills more women than men.

He also says (and this is transparently bullshit)

> In what can only be described as a landslide victory for the matriarchy, men turning 35 are half as likely to make it to 45 as their female counterparts. The same dismal statistic awaits men who make it to 45, and those who make it to 55. Inexplicably the messaging on cardiovascular disease somehow white-washes all of this.

In general, when one person is attempting to "debunk" statistics from government level health statistical organisations (and here he's arguing with CDC-NCHS) they need to be careful with their definitions (he isn't, see the CVD point above), and they need to be really careful with their numbers (he isn't, he's choosing ways to change the data to fit his narrative, rather than using standard methods).


> He starts by saying Go Red for Women claimed that _heart disease_ kills more women than men - they haven't made that claim.

Quoting from https://www.goredforwomen.org/en/about-heart-disease-in-wome...

"Myth: Heart disease is for men, and cancer is the real threat for women

Fact: Heart disease is a killer that strikes more women than men, and is more deadly than all forms of cancer combined."

Seems you're misinformed (to be polite). Perhaps readers should wonder what other statements you've made that you are misinformed about?


Well the entire article is based on a straw poll at a cookout. There was no need to frame this as oppositional or a “battle of the sexes” type deal.


I suspect at the heart of this is that making it a women’s issue is more likely to move the needle in terms of attention and consequently funding. See breast cancer for example.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: