First, I have nothing against the notorious RBG, and hope she lives and remains on the court for as long as she can function as a judge.
That said, this is some crazy statistical logic. Yes, the average includes sick people. If it didn’t, it would be higher since sick people die sooner. In the same way, the average life expectancy includes people killed in car crashes, but that doesn’t mean driving drunk has no effect on lifespan.
If you isolated out of the 85 year old cohort all the people who have had recent pancreatic cancer and subsequent lung cancer, their ‘statistically average’ survival would not be anywhere near 6.8 years. And you can’t declare her ‘unusually healthy’ by taking out the factors that would make her usual, such as cancer. My mother would have been unusually healthy for an 80 year old, if she just hadn’t had diabetes and bowel cancer. But she did, and she died. Not that unusual for an 80 year old.
I’m guessing that if you put RBG’s chart in front of a doctor without her name on it, they’d say something like, ‘she’ll be lucky to make it five years, but people with her history and age can go at any time’.
The unusually good access to health care will help a lot, but let’s not kid ourselves. Any 85 year old person who has had pancreatic and lung cancer is living on borrowed time, and should be grateful for every new day they get.
I personally hope she has a medical power of attorney that says “keep me hooked up to the machines until a Democrat is elected president”. I believe that the only way to remove her from the bench in that case would be for the House to impeach her and the Senate to convict, neither of which seems likely in these divisive times.
As a bonus, it might lead to an amendment to limit federal judicial terms at all levels. 20 years? Although a known end date could lead to game playing by both the judge (screw it, this is my last year (although they can do that anyway)) and people bringing suit (let’s wait until Judge XXX is gone in a couple of weeks).
I’m not sure who has the moral high ground in this discussion. Is it the conservatives secretly wishing she would die, or the liberals only hoping that she lives, even if in a persistent vegetative state or suffering terribly just so that Trump doesn’t get another pick?
it’s not at all common for people to live long based on only machines keeping them alive. That situation normally happens after a car wreck or a stroke or near drowning or similar issue.
I’m not so sure I buy the theory that it was a goof. Didn’t someone in the control room have to call up that specific file from wherever it’s stored on the server, and then make another conscious decision to place it ‘on air’?
Anyway, Oliver Wendell Holmes was just shy of 91 when he retired. RBG has a ways to go to beat that record.
Why would a newspaper intentionally post an obit that they’d know they would have to retract and suffer embarassmrnt for? These things happen from time to time as obits are pre-written for just about every public figure, by pretty much all media. Once in a while they get published by accident.
It really depends on whether you’re talking a cancer death or that from another cause, and obviously they’re not independent.
Still, minus the cancer, RBG seems to be a healthy and mentally robust 85-year-old. Average life expectancy for a women that age is about 7 years. RBG would probably have an even longer than average life expectancy in this regard (assuming in particular that her brain’s robustness is an indicator of her overall health).
On the other hand, her cancer may kill her quickly making this discussion moot. Or, it may be truly well-controlled using modern approaches (especially ‘biologics’) using agents with only modest toxicity (again, ‘biologics’). In the latter event - if her cancer is truly well-controlled - her net life expectancy would then be at least 7 years.
It’s the middle ground of cancer survival that’s less clear - where the cancer is ‘active’ and ‘weakening’ the body directly, or where it’s treatment is doing the same thing due to its toxicity. How likely is this with RBG? We’d need access to her biopsy reports to know.
In the case of Fox: because it would drive up their ratings.* The ‘goof’ appears to be seen by some Trump fans as a delightful treat FoxNews gave them, nudge nudge wink wink. (I’ll link to some tweets later if you’d like.)
*Not that I’m guessing this was planned or decided in a boardroom or such. I’d guess some producer just thought it would be a hoot.
That’s a silly question. The question of moral high ground went out the window when the Republicans blocked any vote on Obama’s nomination. They are the ones who made it where we have to care more about the letter of the law than the spirit.
We are also the ones trying to preserve the Court, while the Heritage list is all about appointing people who support certain political views.
Seriously? You don’t want people on the Court with “certain political views”? So, I’m sure you would be fine with someone who wanted to overturn Roe for example so long as they “preserve the Court” whatever that means.
But I have a sneaking suspicion that “preserving the Court” means that you want solid liberals on the Court which in the new left doublespeak is not at all political.
Except the story doesn’t say they ran an obit. It says they displayed graphic of her with dates listed, a beginning and end date. The end date is what typically signifies the person died. In this case, they claim it was a technical error of some sort. Maybe the graphic artist put in and end date because there was a slot for it, or that just seemed right. Or someone at Fox was intentional.
I despise Fox News but people really do make mistakes. People send embarrassing emails to reply all rather than to a specific person or send a text meant for their significant other to their mother by mistake.
So, I’m inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case.
Yeah, it seemed like a fuck up, not intentional. Graphics like that, just like obits, are kept around all the damn time for people for whom it makes sense to have them. They probably updated RBG’s when her latest cancer diagnosis was announced. They want it ready to go should the worst happen. They don’t want to be waiting on some kid graphic designer to finish updating it when they’re trying to get the story on air.
I assume it was a mistake but a graphic like that would take literally less than a minute to put together by the graphics department. It’s not like an obituary that takes some thought and effort.
You should try working in a newsroom sometime. It’s not the 2 minutes to build it - 2 minutes which are critical to getting it on air - but the 10 minutes of finding out who has the original, finding the graphics guy, arranging delivery and such.