buffy said:

Indeed.

buffy said:

Well, I can’t dispute your conclusions, buffy.

Long story short

Buffy=silent Bob?

gaghalfrunt said:

Buffy=silent Bob?

I think my answer to question 1 is ‘no’ but I am not sure if I understood the question correctly…

Don’t know why that submitted before I’d finished. Anyway, poik provided the link

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/home/australian+health+survey

I am interested in the methods for research. I can’t find how people were selected. I’ll have a bit more of a look around the site. I found this:

“All people selected in the AHS were selected in either the NHS or the NNPAS, however data items in the core were common to both surveys and therefore information for these data items is available for all persons in the AHS. All people were then invited to participate in the voluntary NHMS.”

First problem right there. ‘Invited’ and ‘voluntary’. Immediately you’ve only got those who can be bothered. And quite possibly a preponderance of people with time on their hands. I don’t know of a better way though. If you use health records it’s too fragmented and biassed towards those using health services. If you randomly select in the street you get whoever happens to be about.

>>>Don’t know why that submitted before I’d finished. Anyway, poik provided the link

NSA, CIA, FBI, ASIO, ASIS, MI5 etc they all have glitches in their spyware, ask Wookie

I found the details. It’s complicated. But you still only get those who can be arsed doing the interview and the tests and stuff. And there was a lot of stuff to do.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/D9707300945AE90FCA257B8D00229E78?opendocument

I’m still working my way through this.

It’s very complicated. I’m a bit surprised they didn’t have a bigger dropout rate. But you would have to be dedicated to do the lot. I wonder if the people knew what they were up for before they started.

buffy said:

I found the details. It’s complicated. But you still only get those who can be arsed doing the interview and the tests and stuff.

And amusingly, they still ended up with a high proportion of overweight/obese people…

‘cos they are the people sitting around doing surveys…

buffy said:

‘cos they are the people sitting around doing surveys…

Those types are too lazy…

> First problem right there. ‘Invited’ and ‘voluntary’. Immediately you’ve only got those who can be bothered. And quite possibly a preponderance of people with time on their hands. I don’t know of a better way though. If you use health records it’s too fragmented and biassed towards those using health services. If you randomly select in the street you get whoever happens to be about. … I found the details, it’s complicated.

I participated in a voluntary health survey about asthma, as part of the control group of people without asthma. The request was circulated widely, and even though only a small number of people would have responded, I found the depth of questioning and thoroughness of the investigation to be delightful and wished that the Australian Bureau of Statistics was doing as good a job. Perhaps they are, now.

First problem right there. ‘Invited’ and ‘voluntary’.
——————————————————————————

Normally you would just use hospital records…

But they are not invited and certainly not voluntary.