Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

mysteriously_moist t1_j9m67uq wrote

Reply to comment by insaneintheblain in Women with satisfying relationships tend to have fewer chronic illnesses by BlitzOrion

On the contrary you can only tell the stories the statistics support, that's how statistics work.

4

insaneintheblain t1_j9m6x6v wrote

Any story you like. You can demonstrate for example that the rise in global temperatures have coincided with a rise in divorces.

The stories you choose to believe are those which best suit your existing worldview

−1

mysteriously_moist t1_j9mbryi wrote

That could well be true, poor environmental health may cause more illness and economic issues. However this is the point of the scientific method, it's intention is to separate false correlations from actual evidence supporting the hypothesis.

In this particular study it is quite straightforward though, the only factor being scrutinised is gender and the only context is divorce after a serious medical diagnosis. a rate of 6 times higher is quite an outstanding amount, a much higher amount than the normal divorce rate initiated by men. In normal circumstances women initiate 70% of divorces, so if gender was unrelated in the particular circumstance of divorce due to medical issues (with a similar gendered group sample size as in this study) you would assume that women would still initiate more divorces. However that is not the case, in fact it swings quite far on the side of men initiating more divorce in that context.

That is the observation in its whole, the study does not delve into the reasoning behind it. Factors such as financial responsibility could play a part especially in areas without universal health care but statistics don't care much for reasoning. This was not a study on why it is the case just if it is the case and it found that it was. A female patients likelihood of being divorced by her partner shortly after diagnosis was 20.8% vs a male patient at 2.9%, this is not a small difference and the link to gender is clear. Just like accepting evidence to fit your narrative can be unwise, ignoring evidence to fit yours isn't great either.

2

insaneintheblain t1_j9md5mw wrote

Correlation ≠ causation

This study is looking at the number of self-reported satisfying relationships and comparing it with how many have a chronic illness.

1

mysteriously_moist t1_j9mgcn4 wrote

>Correlation ≠ causation

I am aware that was the point of me bringing up the scientific method as a way of distinguishing the two.

We were not talking about this study, we were talking about the validity of the study that supports the theory that men are more likely to leave women with serious illnesses, than women are to leave men with serious illnesses. Which you were dismissive of.

My only point was to provide evidence for it being a common belief, as I and many other people are aware of this research. I am not involved in the original conversation of a potential study from the perspective of men concerning the health benifits of being in happy relationships. I would assume they would also be healthier as less stress is better regardless of gender, but in the world of science you don't know unless you do various studies to find out.

2

insaneintheblain t1_j9mpos6 wrote

For example I do not believe it - it is therefore not a common belief, merely a popular one.

Statistics give an indication of what could be, never reveal what is.

What is the validity of having a study comparing men with women? Does it achieve a goal of enlightening the individual of their own circumstances?

The more you ask questions of it (using the scientific method) the more it falls apart.

2

mysteriously_moist t1_j9n1fpo wrote

You are in denial of data, asking morality questions to numbers is like asking a brick wall to describe the colour green. Your feelings do not change the numbers, the numbers do not care if you would rather not think about the increased likelihood of men leaving their seriously ill partners.

If you do not agree with the study then disprove it with your own, that is how it is done. Until then I'm afraid any philosophical questions or your own personal beliefs do nothing to change the statistics.

2