tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post3621767387444120926..comments2023-09-11T08:30:08.843-07:00Comments on Life Training Institute Blog: What the Contraceptive Choice Study Really Shows [Serge]SKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01905606527143286458noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-79828019731046752202012-10-18T08:19:28.499-07:002012-10-18T08:19:28.499-07:00My companion piece to yours is up. http://www.what...My companion piece to yours is up. http://www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2012/10/preliminary_thoughts_on_the_co.htmlLydia McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00423567323116960820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-14070933455681830892012-10-16T17:05:33.570-07:002012-10-16T17:05:33.570-07:00That is pretty confusing, but it definitely says &...That is pretty confusing, but it definitely says "estimated," which lends support to what New says. Lydia McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00423567323116960820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-11415139345229200262012-10-16T13:17:35.884-07:002012-10-16T13:17:35.884-07:00I believe it was in the way the data was standardi...I believe it was in the way the data was standardized. To be honest, I was confused by the original paper, which I was able to track down today. I'll provide a long quote from the part where they speak how they estimated the abortion rates. I can get the pdf of the original article to you if you wish - pm me on facebook.<br /><br />"Although not an a priori primary outcome of interest, we also estimated abortion rates because the majority of abortions result from unintended pregnancies... <br /><br />"Abortion rates among participants aged 15–44 years and births among participants aged 15–19 years within CHOICE were compared with regional and national rates. Because the CHOICE cohort represents a higher-risk population (median age of 25 years and 50% black) than the general population, we standardized the CHOICE abortion rate to the age and racial (black and white) distribution of females who reside in the St. Louis region using data from the 2010 U.S. Census (direct standardization). We compared the CHOICE standardized rate with the St. Louis regional<br />rate using data from the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services and with the national rate<br />using the most recent published data from 2008."Serge (Rich Poupard)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06648112986475922045noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1442827238174603755.post-63897244181513680832012-10-16T09:56:26.897-07:002012-10-16T09:56:26.897-07:00Excellent, Serge, thanks! I think it's especia...Excellent, Serge, thanks! I think it's especially telling that they give as a criterion of inclusion in the study that the women must be willing to "change their method" of family planning! That's pretty huge as far as the question of representative sample. Obviously not all women in general, even those who presently use contraception, are willing to change their method! It appears that they allowed them to change their method to pills or rings, but this might have been a change from, say, condoms or some other barrier or spermicidal method. Women who were satisfied with this method or who wanted to "take their chances" on getting pregnant were, of course, not included in the study.<br /><br />I have another question: Michael J. New states that the abortion rates were not per se taken from actual study participants. He seems to be implying that they were estimated in some fashion and that some of the reduction in abortions may therefore have come from non-participants.<br /><br />I've looked quickly over both the Powerpoint and the summary, and neither of them addresses the question of how they got their abortion statistics. Naturally, one would assume that when they say something about the abortion rate among participants, they are actually talking about abortions among participants! So New's claim is a pretty big deal. But I can't figure out where he's getting it from. I wrote an e-mail to the NRO site but haven't gotten a reply yet.<br /><br />Do you have any clue to why he is saying that the abortions among participants were not actually just counting participants?Lydia McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00423567323116960820noreply@blogger.com