are the people who arent represented in the stats

which skew the numbers up

Huh?

Did you not see the data above? 27% of people with serious medical conditions skip reccomended tests

if the nhs lopped the most vulnerable 9% off its patients of its reported numbers

ok champ

i see it

Of these people, 23% had a negative effect on health.

ok

I.e condition worsened.

And that 23% does not mean death either

???

whats your point here

your agreeing with my case

That we can reasonably conclude any effect on survival rates would be small or negligible.

no

we cannot reasonably conclude

I am gonna say the n word

Because the vast majority of people are diagnosed.

that the poorest people

niggerrrrr

the ones who are the most likely to die of cnacer

are not in fact dying of cancer

because reasons

Yeah but you aren't proving that, the data I gave was on people with serious med conditions.

This includes everyone, the people who skip because of costs tend to be poorer.

my entire argument is that there seems to be around 7% of the us population that cannot afford adequate medical treatment; these are the people who are at the greatest risk of diseases. these people are left out of survival data thus skewing the numbers up

And of these poorer people, 23% found a reduction in condition.

the data you gave supports my argument

23% of 27% is around 7%

How? My data is arguing the *vast majority* of people consume tests, and 23% of the 27% who *skip* see their condition *worsen*

yes

This worsen does not equal deaths, which is an even lower percentage

the people who dont consume tests

see their conditions worsen in some cases

this is not represented in the survival statistics

And in even smaller cases, die.

what do you think worsened conditions mean in relation to cancer

While that may be true, it does not change the statistic much. Because they're a tiny fraction of the population.

As in stage 1 becomes stage 2

Or symptoms become worse.