• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Forbes Fabricates Figures

Karl

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
5,561
Reaction score
1,589
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
In a DP discussion of new Obamacare fees which has gone wildly off topic (http://www.debatepolitics.com/obamacare-aca/181904-new-obamacare-fees-coming-2014-w-41-a.html), I was hit with two links in one post referring to the same NY Post article on doctors who are not signing up to participate in exchange health insurance policies. The article was based upon a NY state poll. Forbes made the following claim:

[...] The New York Post recently reported on a very troubling survey from the New York State Medical Society, [1] which found that 44 percent of New York doctors are not participating in Obamacare. Worse yet, [2]three-fourths of those who are participating are being forced to because of existing insurance contracts. [...]

Docs resisting ObamaCare | New York Post

1. This part, in bold, is a falsehood. The truth is that 44% of the doctors who responded to the poll (survey) are not participating in Obamacare (not accepting patients with exchange health insurance) (keep in mind this poll is not dated but the file was last modified Oct. 30th). They only received 409 answers to that question, and I presume there are more than 409 doctors in New York. Now while you can use a poll to predicted total outcomes, this poll has no features of a professional poll, such as confidence interval and margin of error, nor was it seemingly conducted by a qualified, professional polling/survey company.

2. This part, also in bold, is a gross misrepresentation of the facts presented by the poll results in another falsehood. This claim consists of two parts:

1. The first poll question asked doctors how many exchange insurance companies they were doing business with. 44% said none, as noted above. 33.5% said they were not sure. In order to get the "three-fourths" that Forbes claimed, they had to assume that these 33.5% were also not accepting any exchange insurance policies. Hopefully everyone can agree that "not sure" is probably 1 or more, not "none".

2. The next question asked how many doctors freely chose to accept exchange patients and how many were forced to accept exchange patients because an insurance company they were already doing business with required them to (or lose all that company's business). The compared this latter number to 22.6% who gave a firm number in response to the first question above, when they should have compared it to that 22.6% plus the 33.5% that were "not sure" how many exchange policies/networks/companies they were doing business with. The result is they greatly inflated their claim (it would be less than half the "three fourths" that they claim).​

The actual poll is here: http://www.mssny.org/surveys/HealthExchange_10282013.pdf

Clearly, whomever wrote the Forbes article is rather stupid or is trying to manipulate their readership by giving them false information. In any case, it is yet another example that you cannot take 'reporting' at face value, especially if there is a history or expectation of deceit; you have to dig down to the original source and see if the reporting is truthful.
 
That's a good question....

Well, in a thread titled "Forbes Fabricates Figures", I expected to see what figures they fabricated, and what their claims were, neither of which are included in the op. :lol:
 
Well, in a thread titled "Forbes Fabricates Figures", I expected to see what figures they fabricated, and what their claims were, neither of which are included in the op. :lol:

You know what's funny... This is the second thread Karl has created today where he makes claims that aren't backed up... He also made a claim about something said on Fox News radio, that has no transcripts, audio or anything at all that supports it.
 
In a DP discussion of new Obamacare fees which has gone wildly off topic (http://www.debatepolitics.com/obamacare-aca/181904-new-obamacare-fees-coming-2014-w-41-a.html), I was hit with two links in one post referring to the same NY Post article on doctors who are not signing up to participate in exchange health insurance policies. The article was based upon a NY state poll. Forbes made the following claim:



1. This part, in bold, is a falsehood. The truth is that 44% of the doctors who responded to the poll (survey) are not participating in Obamacare (not accepting patients with exchange health insurance) (keep in mind this poll is not dated but the file was last modified Oct. 30th). They only received 409 answers to that question, and I presume there are more than 409 doctors in New York. Now while you can use a poll to predicted total outcomes, this poll has no features of a professional poll, such as confidence interval and margin of error, nor was it seemingly conducted by a qualified, professional polling/survey company.

2. This part, also in bold, is a gross misrepresentation of the facts presented by the poll results in another falsehood. This claim consists of two parts:

1. The first poll question asked doctors how many exchange insurance companies they were doing business with. 44% said none, as noted above. 33.5% said they were not sure. In order to get the "three-fourths" that Forbes claimed, they had to assume that these 33.5% were also not accepting any exchange insurance policies. Hopefully everyone can agree that "not sure" is probably 1 or more, not "none".

2. The next question asked how many doctors freely chose to accept exchange patients and how many were forced to accept exchange patients because an insurance company they were already doing business with required them to (or lose all that company's business). The compared this latter number to 22.6% who gave a firm number in response to the first question above, when they should have compared it to that 22.6% plus the 33.5% that were "not sure" how many exchange policies/networks/companies they were doing business with. The result is they greatly inflated their claim (it would be less than half the "three fourths" that they claim).​

The actual poll is here: http://www.mssny.org/surveys/HealthExchange_10282013.pdf

Clearly, whomever wrote the Forbes article is rather stupid or is trying to manipulate their readership by giving them false information. In any case, it is yet another example that you cannot take 'reporting' at face value, especially if there is a history or expectation of deceit; you have to dig down to the original source and see if the reporting is truthful.
1. I don't see the fabrication. Based on the 409 doctors surveyed that is the results. Sounds like it was done similar to any other poll
2. it does not say 75% do not participate. It says 75% of those that do, meaning of the 56% remaining 75% are forced to because of current contracts
3. Where it can be misleading is here. is the 75% talking just about the 22% or is it including the 33% who don't know/refused to answer
 
Does the New York Health Exchange have more credibility than the Obama administration ?

Which has what to do with what? This is just another inane non-sequitur.
 
Where is the link to the Forbes article?

Here. I put the wrong link in the OP. Doh!

[...] The New York Post recently reported on a very troubling survey from the New York State Medical Society, [1] which found that 44 percent of New York doctors are not participating in Obamacare. Worse yet, [2]three-fourths of those who are participating are being forced to because of existing insurance contracts. [...]

When Will The Government Start Forcing Doctors To See Obamacare Patients? - Forbes
 
[...] 3. Where it can be misleading is here. is the 75% talking just about the 22% or is it including the 33% who don't know/refused to answer
No, it does not include the 33.5%, and it should. And those 33.5% did not refuse to answer, but they did not know how many policies/insurers they were participating with.
 
Here. I put the wrong link in the OP. Doh!

So, the Forbes article links an article from the NY Post, but Forbes is fabricating figures...........just how?
And if your response is that the NYPost is fabricating numbers, just how are they doing that?
 
No, it does not include the 33.5%, and it should. And those 33.5% did not refuse to answer, but they did not know how many policies/insurers they were participating with.
well if they are unsure, it can't accurately include them. so maybe take those numbers out completely and base it off the two thirds it accurately can determine. which would be roughly what? 305-306. Now it could have dug deeper into the 33.5% to get a more accurate number
 
And completely made up. Anyone who takes this story seriously has got somthing wrong because this story showed plenty of signs of being false.

It read like the Onion. The pic looks photoshopped.
 
1. I don't see the fabrication. Based on the 409 doctors surveyed that is the results. Sounds like it was done similar to any other poll [...]
Mmm, no. If they had said "a survey of 409 doctors show that 44% do not participate in Obamacare", that would be true.

If they had said "according to a survey of NY doctors, 44% do not participate in Obamacare", that would be true. Of course since the survey appears to not be a professional effort (again, no confidence interval, no margin of error) any reputable journalist would use it with great caution.

Instead, it says "a survey found 44 percent of New York doctors are not participating in Obamacare". The fact that it is a survey is somewhat removed from the claim.

The difference is subtle but the inference is clear. "44 percent of New York doctors are not participating in Obamacare" is definitive, and leaves no room for doubt. If there are 10,000 doctors in New York, then 4,400 of them do not participate in Obamacare. Period. And that's the bias. The first example I gave above, citing the number in the survey, would be the unbiased way to have reported the issue.

And no, the poll was clearly not a professional one, as noted above, but that's not the issue.
 
An no, the poll was clearly not a professional one, as noted above, but that's not the issue.

It appears to have been a survey taken by a professional organization, among their own members, which happen to be doctors. I'm not sure what your beef is with them taking the survey with a cross-sampling of their own members. I haven't seen anyone claim that it was a professional survey, nor that it was scientifically done. The Forbes piece links quite a few links, addressing various issues wrt the effect that obamacare is expected to have on doctors themselves.
 
well if they are unsure, it can't accurately include them. [...]
But they are accurately excluding them, by assuming that since that group said they were unsure of the number they meant none or zero. They can't do what they did -- it is unethical math, and it is almost certainly incorrect by a factor of at least two. Given the uncertainty of the 33.5% group, they should not have made the "three fourths" calculation at all.

But they did, because they wanted the bias. Obamacare bad . . . . . .
 
Back
Top Bottom