许志永律师

[瘦不了你]

西方人比较忌讳13这个数字，因此，希尔顿13层是不存在滴。
瘦哥，您是想表达这个意思，是不？
不是您说的吗？游客很多，某些人看到了，不一定明白是开玩笑，或许当真了呢。

抱歉啊。。。。。

我自己掌嘴40下。。。

 

[瘦不了你]

你说的那一堆人统统不认识，你还真有空！

好奇害死猫。。。。。。

 

[晓风宿雨]

抱歉啊。。。。。

我自己掌嘴40下。。。

不用啦， 你跟我说说那个帖子的事情，成不？
不然，你悄悄给我解释一下，成不？
哪里的内容比较晦涩？

 

[瘦不了你]

不用啦， 你跟我说说那个帖子的事情，成不？
不然，你悄悄给我解释一下，成不？
哪里的内容比较晦涩？

好奇丢了樱桃。。。。。。

明天悄悄话，今天太困了。。。。。。。

晚安。。。

 

[晓风宿雨]

好奇丢了樱桃。。。。。。

明天悄悄话，今天太困了。。。。。。。

晚安。。。

别走啊。。。
大家都去睡觉了，我找谁讲话捏。。。
你走了，我就要宣布强尼赢了呢。

 

[瘦不了你]

别走啊。。。
大家都去睡觉了，我找谁讲话捏。。。
你走了，我就要宣布强尼赢了呢。

宣布吧。。。，反正二审能上诉。。。。。。，真坚持不住了，抱歉。。。

 

[晓风宿雨]

下面
我宣布
以楼主为代表的正方以压倒性分数取胜！
我们也衷心感谢以瘦哥为代表的反方的精彩辩论！
此议题已经结束，我们接下来讨论下一个议题：
你如何看待宋林的被免职？

 

[晓风宿雨]

宣布吧。。。，反正二审能上诉。。。。。。，真坚持不住了，抱歉。。。

这是终审判决，不得上诉。如有异议，解释权在我方，谢谢。

 

[瘦不了你]

有点儿喝了2斤十年老花雕的节奏。。。。。。

我表态，本人放弃上诉的权利，完全服从判决。。。。。。。


晚安，裁判长，审判员，和书记员同志们，您们辛苦了。。。。（鞠躬）

 

[晓风宿雨]

有点儿喝了2斤老十年花雕的节奏。。。。。。

喝了一杯中杯咖啡，我贪杯了。。。

 

[晓风宿雨]

有点儿喝了2斤十年老花雕的节奏。。。。。。

我表态，本人放弃上诉的权利，完全服从判决。。。。。。。

就冲你第二句，我就送你一句：侬是模子！跟俺大哥今天一样。
晕死，一个帖子三句话，分三次说。你该看医生去了。。。
BTW，“您们”这个词不对，某有滴。俺也难得发挥一下校对功能。

 

[Johnny1008]

我的想法，不足为你参考，在你眼中我不过是个低智商，
我的行为和想法无论怎样，也改变不了加拿大及澳大利亚统计局的长年统计结果。
这之间没必然联系：我在加拿大住几年，就能抹煞几十万人的统计结果。

[FONT=微软雅黑]我只是想知道，为什么一个理科高材生，会不顾科学报告的权威性，

毅然决然的跟着科学统计唱对台戏？

如果你单纯只是对着“吸烟有害健康”唱对台戏也就算了，好歹再怎么有害也是害你自己！

但是，你偏要跟着“移民早死”唱对台戏？！

这是你一个人的事儿吗？你这不是那你家人的性命开玩笑吗！这是不是有点儿太不负责了？

而且，这个世界上除了中国之外，就只剩下一个加拿大了？

你就非要往这个你清楚的知道医疗不行，食品有害，空气糟糕，治安极差的地方跑啊？

说你是爱心泛滥跑来扶贫或者支教的，那也算是个理由，

可您明明是花了大堆的票子，出了大力费了大劲才跑到这个你万般不爽、千般不悦的加拿大来！

这实在是极其令人费解啊？您这到底是图个啥啊？[/FONT]

 

[小和尚]

俺看过你发过一次表格，但是就觉得有问题，方法学统计学上。

但因为自己大学时候统计学也学得不是太好，不想纠缠。

如果可以，你把你的链接发给俺，俺明天有空看看，俺要是看不出毛病，让胖熊等高人看看。。

大家可以想象加拿大统计局人才如云，医学统计学都有专家：
统计学如果不精，可以看结论部分：

Introduction
In recent years, annual immigration to Canada has totalled
more than 230,000.1 About two-thirds (69.3%) of the 1.6
million increase in the Canadian population between 2001 and
2006 was attributable to immigration. By 2006, immigrants
made up one-fi fth (19.8%) of the population, a percentage
that is expected to reach 25% to 28% by 2031.2
The health and the health care needs of this large and
growing share of the population are not necessarily the same
as those of people born in Canada.3,4 Earlier studies have
found a “healthy immigrant eff ect”; specifi cally, immigrants’
health is better than that of the Canadian-born, but it tends
to decline as their years in Canada increase.5,6 This reduction
in immigrants’ health advantage is apparent in self-reported
general health,7-9 chronic diseases,10,11 disability,12 and mental
health.13-15 However, the relationship between immigration
and health is complex. It involves both pre- and postmigration
factors, for which information is often lacking.
Hence, comparing the health of immigrants to that of the
Canadian-born population is challenging.16
An additional factor is the increasing diversity in immigrants’
origins. Since the 1960s, the major source countries have shifted
from European to non-European nations. Consequently, it is
important to analyze the healthy immigrant eff ect by world
region and by period of immigration. However, small sample
sizes have meant that most studies could not be conducted at
this level of detail.
A comprehensive review of analyses of the relationship
between immigration and health17 found that the relatively
few studies of disease-specifi c mortality among immigrants
compared with the Canadian population generally supported
the healthy immigrant eff ect.18-22 More recently, all-cause
mortality in immigrants was compared with that in the
Canadian-born population.23-26 Using unlinked 1991 mortality
data, Trovato23 found evidence of a healthy immigrant eff ect,
but could not examine associations with period of immigration,
immigration class, or socio-economic factors. DesMeules et
al.26 linked a random sample of 1980 to 1990 Citizenship and
Immigration Canada landing fi les to 1980 to 1999 mortality
data for all provinces and to health care data for Ontario,
Quebec and British Columbia to study mortality risks by age,
sex, region of birth, immigration category and time in Canada.
The results generally supported the healthy immigrant eff ect
and its eventual loss, notwithstanding some cause-specifi c
exceptions. Though lacking in socio-economic data, that
study contained detailed information about immigration (for
example, immigration status, immigration class and period
of immigration). It also found higher mortality rates among
refugees than among other immigrants.
The present analysis used the 1991 to 2001 census mortality
follow-up study to explore associations between mortality
and dimensions of immigration such as country of birth
and period of immigration. An earlier analysis of the same
database by Wilkins et al.26 showed a healthy immigrant eff ect,
but the results pertained to the total immigrant population,
with the sexes combined. The objectives of the present study
were to determine:
1. if immigrants tend to have better health as measured by
age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs) than does the
Canadian-born population (overall healthy immigrant
effect);
2. if immigrants’ initial health advantage lessens over time
(duration effect); and
3. how results vary for immigrant subgroups, by world
regions and selected countries at the Canada level and in
Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.
The analysis was conducted separately by sex for all causes
combined and for circulatory diseases and cancer. To simplify
the presentation, the disease-specifi c results are included in
the appendix.


Discussion
The 1991 to 2001 census mortality follow-up study permits
analysis of the healthy immigrant eff ect—the dominant
hypothesis in immigrant health research—by world region
of birth and for diff erent areas of Canada. This hypothesis
suggests that immigrants arrive with better health than the
Canadian-born population, but that this health advantage
tends to disappear over time. The results of this study provide
overall support for this trend. However, similar to earlier
research,24,25 the analysis of ASMRs by world region of origin,
period of immigration and residence reveals underlying
diff erences that may not be evident when only the overall
results are examined.
For example, the study found that female immigrants
from South Asia tended to have high ASMRs for circulatory
disease. This result confi rms previous research that found
high circulatory disease mortality rates among South Asians
in Asian and non-Asian countries,28 although results had been

* significantly different from Canadian-born population at Census Metropolitan Area level
Note : Reference population (person-years at risk) for age standardization was taken from age distribution of entire cohort (5 -year age groups).
Source: 1991 to 2001 Canadian census mortality follow-up study.
mixed for fi rst-generation immigrants from these areas and
resident in Canada. A study based on Canadian mortality
data from the 1960s to the 1980s, which did not reveal an
elevated risk for circulatory disease, reasoned that because
of the immigration system’s selection criteria pertaining to
health status, South Asian immigrants might not be fully
representative of the South Asian population in general.22
Nonetheless, a more recent study based on mortality data
from 1979 to 1993 found high circulatory disease mortality
among South Asians of both sexes in Canada.20
Heterogeneity in ASMRs within immigrant subgroups living
in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal was also evident in
this study. For example, men born in Eastern Europe and
resident in Vancouver were found to have relatively high
circulatory disease ASMRs, but their counterparts in Toronto
and Montreal did not. This result highlights the importance
of conducting country-specifi c and disease-specifi c research
at the the CMA level.

 

[wenzhouboy]

你说对了。。。，我原以为那个Vinte是个女ID，可是后来看那个柠檬师长，柠檬25，还真象一个男的，可再看那个Duchess，却像个女的。。。，然后就彻底晕菜了，再然后就成了深井冰了。。。。

把简单的问题复杂化，离深井冰也就不远了。。。

 

[Johnny1008]

大家可以想象加拿大统计局人才如云，医学统计学都有专家：
统计学如果不精，可以看结论部分：.

[FONT=微软雅黑]人家要看统计部分，你不给人家看，

反而拿出从这个“不让人看”的统计部分得出的结论来给人家看？

奇怪了，此前没人说自己是有统计学底子的时候，

你老是贴出一大堆表格来给大家搞脑子，

现在有高人向你要统计学数据，你倒是张口就来“可以看结论部分”！

怎么每次跟您谈点实际问题，您都是这副东拉西扯，答非所问的状态啊？



再说了，既然你结论部分读的如此滚瓜烂熟，领会的如此通透明晰，

怎么你还是在乐此不疲的往这个“健康逐渐丧失”的地方跑呢？

难道是觉得你太健康了，想找点不健康的东西来玩玩吗？[/FONT]

 

[小和尚]

[FONT=微软雅黑]人家要看统计部分，你不给人家看，

反而拿出从这个“不让人看”的统计部分得出的结论来给人家看？

奇怪了，此前没人说自己是有统计学底子的时候，

你老是贴出一大堆表格来给大家搞脑子，

现在有高人向你要统计学数据，你倒是张口就来“可以看结论部分”！

怎么每次跟您谈点实际问题，您都是这副东拉西扯，答非所问的状态啊？



再说了，既然你结论部分读的如此滚瓜烂熟，领会的如此通透明晰，

怎么你还是在乐此不疲的往这个“健康逐渐丧失”的地方跑呢？

难道是觉得你太健康了，想找点不健康的东西来玩玩吗？[/FONT]

你不要万马奔腾思绪万千地想太多，
表格的PDF文件我不知道怎么粘贴，直接上传PDF整个文件吧，见附录。
强尼你认为加拿大统计局出统计方法上的小儿科错误的概率是多少？呵呵。

 

[晓风宿雨]

如果有任何一方是女的，那个拍小强的帖子的事实成立吗？

就算都是男的，我想我的态度也表达的很清楚了。。。。。。

你的意思就是逼着人家不能承认他是男的，来赢你的赌注？所以，浪漫说你够毒的？Bs你？
可是，我理解的也没错啊。你有你的想法，人家可以理解另外一层意思，你不能说别人的想法跟你的不一样，就说人家没逻辑吧！
抱歉，本来喝了咖啡就睡不着觉的人，带着问题更睡不着觉了 。劳烦瘦哥你明天及时回答。

 

[小和尚]

[FONT=微软雅黑]我只是想知道，为什么一个理科高材生，会不顾科学报告的权威性，

毅然决然的跟着科学统计唱对台戏？

如果你单纯只是对着“吸烟有害健康”唱对台戏也就算了，好歹再怎么有害也是害你自己！

但是，你偏要跟着“移民早死”唱对台戏？！

这是你一个人的事儿吗？你这不是那你家人的性命开玩笑吗！这是不是有点儿太不负责了？

而且，这个世界上除了中国之外，就只剩下一个加拿大了？

你就非要往这个你清楚的知道医疗不行，食品有害，空气糟糕，治安极差的地方跑啊？

说你是爱心泛滥跑来扶贫或者支教的，那也算是个理由，

可您明明是花了大堆的票子，出了大力费了大劲才跑到这个你万般不爽、千般不悦的加拿大来！

这实在是极其令人费解啊？您这到底是图个啥啊？[/FONT]

一个文科高材生，痛恨中国的政府，痛恨中国的环境，痛恨中国人民的习性，
还死命赖在中国，这实在是极其令人费解啊？您这到底是图个啥啊？

 

[leoo]

他们争夺，关你我p4啊。

呀！不管你屁事，你回我帖子掺合啥？

当然关我事，版主选举时，看那伙人心术不正，抢夺版主就看不顺眼了，

一个个就是小人`，为了一个破版主，什么卑鄙的事都做，却总在论坛装得人模狗样的，让人烦！


一个天天装正义，夸夸其谈的所谓民主人士，只不过是几个喜欢拉邦结伙，爱整事的小人。

 

[小和尚]

俺看过你发过一次表格，但是就觉得有问题，方法学统计学上。

但因为自己大学时候统计学也学得不是太好，不想纠缠。

如果可以，你把你的链接发给俺，俺明天有空看看，俺要是看不出毛病，让胖熊等高人看看。。

方医生，您好，

大家这么称呼您，我也跟着这么称呼，如有冒犯请原谅。

加拿大统计局历时十年的统计结果我已经用PDF格式把文档上传到附件里，请查收。结论是：
Immigrants arrive with better health than theCanadian-born population, 移民带着比土生加拿大人更健康的身体来,
But that this health advantage tends to disappear over time .但健康优势随移民时间增长而逐渐消失.

您是医师，英文应该了得，您把您对此研究因为研究方法上的失误导致结论的错误的详细情况用英文发给加拿大统计局相关人员（文后有联系方法）
如果觉得不是很成熟，以您医师的身份发不妥，您可以发给我，我来以我的名义转发，并把回复及时公布给大家。

因为此文对华裔移民至关重要，几万移民如果有1%受不实信息毒害，也有好几百会因为此改变人生轨迹。
与其漫无休止地和强尼争执浪费时间，不如为移民做点实事。

盼复

先谢谢