John Logsdon wrote (in part):
> A small issue with Kevins comprehensive discourse on mortality is that
> Pakistan has had quite serious wars over the past 60 years.
>
[big snip]
> So while Pakistan may be a useful analogue for Iraq, comments based on
> changes in life expectancy or death rate between the two countries must
> take into account the histories in some way. Not an easy thing to do I
> agree...
>
John's right to point out the history, of course, but I think he's
really making my point from the other end, so to speak --- the point of
a (period) life expectancy is that it depends /only/ on mortality
experience in the period in question --- so if it's the life expectancy
at birth for 2001 it depends only on the age-specific mortality rates in
2001 and not on the previous history. Average age at death, for deaths
in a particular year, depends on the population age structure in that
year, which in turn depends in a possibly horrendously complicated way
on the history of the people who happen to be living in the country in
question in that year (so involves previous migration, mortality and
fertility even in an area where the borders haven't changed).
Regards,
Kevin
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|