You’re one of them? Really?
Where is your epidemiology degree from? Which university or health department do you work for?
Send us links to some of your published papers.
Or, as was said before, Grace, you are not an epidemiologist.
Bad News Thread
- Thread starter kickingandscreaming
- Start date
Where is your epidemiology degree from? Which university or health department do you work for?
Send us links to some of your published papers.
Or, as was said before, Grace, you are not an epidemiologist.
A couple of comments from
Reading comprehension. Your issue was about working with comps. I work with comps. I do it day in and day out. Epidemiologists do not work with comps. Comps are inexact tools for approximation, which is why their usefulness is limited. Which is why the argument "masks work in Asia" isn't very useful.
Reading comprehension. Your issue was about working with comps. I work with comps. I do it day in and day out. Epidemiologists do not work with comps. Comps are inexact tools for approximation, which is why their usefulness is limited. Which is why the argument "masks work in Asia" isn't very useful.
Fauci "mispeaks" again and has to walk back another opinion.
www.reuters.com
Fauci apologizes for casting doubt over UK's approval of Pfizer vaccine
Anthony Fauci, the top U.S. infectious diseases expert, apologized on Thursday after casting doubt over the rigor of the British regulators who approved the Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19 and said he had faith in their work.
www.reuters.com
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
I used to be a math teacher. That was one of the nicer things I was called during that time.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Can any of these guys get out of their own way?Fauci "mispeaks" again and has to walk back another opinion.
Fauci apologizes for casting doubt over UK's approval of Pfizer vaccine
Anthony Fauci, the top U.S. infectious diseases expert, apologized on Thursday after casting doubt over the rigor of the British regulators who approved the Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19 and said he had faith in their work.
I've defended Fauci and felt he has been operating in good faith, but now I'm beginning to wonder and leaning more to GraceT's opinion of him. Ultimately, that's on Trump. He should have taken Fauci to the woodshed privately (not on twitter) on his mixed messaging months ago. Fauci in front of Congress would always respond that's a political question and refuse to answer. Then he goes on the TV shows and gives opinions with political ramifications. Personally, I felt Birx was way more circumspect.
Hüsker Dü
DA
The worlds leading authority? No brainer, ironically exactly what trump and his cult are, no brainers.
I liked Birx. She's also a pro lockdowner but is much more circumspect and careful than Fauci. I still think Fauci is pretty much operating on good faith. It's just he has a limited ability to view his biases (heavily towards his areas of expertise whether it's vaccines or purely the health numbers to the exclusion of other things) and I think it was kicking who said he's just a disaster on the PR aspect of his job.
It was Trump's fault for elevating him, yes. But as a career bureaucrat there is little Trump could do to fire him without setting off another constitutional crisis. It's been rumored he was close, but was pursuaded not to since it would backfire in the election. Fat lot it did him.
Soccer Bum 06
SILVER
I stopped trusting his opinions months ago. He seems to love the limelight this pandemic has given him. This along with his political leanings have clouded his judgement and created an ego he must feed each Sunday when he joins the morning shows and spouts off what he believes that week.Fauci "mispeaks" again and has to walk back another opinion.
Fauci apologizes for casting doubt over UK's approval of Pfizer vaccine
Anthony Fauci, the top U.S. infectious diseases expert, apologized on Thursday after casting doubt over the rigor of the British regulators who approved the Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19 and said he had faith in their work.
She was pro lockdown but on a micro level. I can't recall the term she used for it, but it was on an individual county by county basis. I don't remember her making broad sweeping generalizations like Fauci does.
Biden isn't exactly off to a rip roaring start in my book. Yesterday, he said that Fauci has been offered the chief medical advisor role. He also came out for a 100 day mask policy. He should know better than that after 2 weeks to slow the spread. If it actually works, he might be forced to extend it and by saying really forcefully he really promises only 100 days he's backed himself into a corner. But more likely (given Europe) it doesn't work and he's embarassed or has to turn around and blame people. Regardless, there isn't any science behind the 100 in 100 days and it's basically a sales slogan (he's probably hoping to catch the drop due to vaccine distribution and declare his policy a victory). Then there was his statement that schools should reopen, but it will cost billions of dollars to retrofit them all with new ventilation systems (so assuming he'd get the money, they'd do this over the summer or something so Fall 2021 for school reopenings).
I'm not exactly disappointed though or saying he's done. None of the other democratic leaders around the world (whether left or right) have done much better.
You said you are ”one of them“. “Them“, in this context, means people who forecast epidemics and epidemic control measures for a living.
It does not mean anyone who does comparisons.
You, on this board, have demonstrated a level of mathmatical sophistication roughly at a high school pre-calculus level.
Before you are qualified to do “comps“ of this sort, you need stats, biostats, multivariate calc, differential equations, non linear differential equations, and at least two classes in biological dynamical systems.
Then, and only then, will you be even remotely qualified to do a “comp” of the kind you are trying to do.
Meh. The vast majority of the population is either subject to a mask mandate or wearing them voluntarily. He's just playing to his base.
You say that like its a bad thing? If you said that to me I would take it as a complement. I took 2 years of Calculus in HS (from a HS teacher that wrote his own calculus book) and 1 year in college. I can't even tell you what calculus is, but I think it involves the sigma sign? I have mad algebra skills though!
Just a reminder that the virus isn't a math problem, we went through this before with all the claims of exponential growth, that never materialized. Or Keepermom2 prediction of running out of ICU beds based on math. The virus does as it pleases regardless of math.
I actually finished BC calculus with honors and a 5 on the AP test. I took basic statitstics in college as well. I know someone as vaunted as you with such a math degree that you can teach mathematics looks down on us lower math peons. I'll admit it's not my forte. For more complicated comps, we have MBAs that run the numbers. That's not where the trick is. The trick is getting the feel for it and if it's right. Ever see the movie margin call?....it's the difference between the guys running the numbers amd the Jeremy Irons character. But in any case, that's not the situation you are citing. But don't tell me I don't know how to do a comp....it's one of the things I do, thank you very much, and do quite well actually.
Your problem is that your proposition is harder to defend than mine. To show that masks aren't working, I only have to point to the numerous situations in which they aren't. You not only have to show why we should distinguish that, but also show a circumstance where they are. I then only need to show a reason why your cited circumstance (YOUR comp) doesn't work....to distinguish it away. It's not "fair" but your job is actually harder than mine. And if I were in your shoes (a teacher) I'd have to give you a failing grade for your efforts so far....because we look everywhere around the world and masks are a failing proposition.
By the by, for a guy who is horrified by ad hominem attacks you sure do engage in a lot of them. Guess tournament hypocrisy isn't your only hypocrisy.
Fair.
I’d actually pegged you as having taken calc and basic stats in college but forgotten it. Leaves you functioning at a pre-calc level, which is too weak for what you’re trying to do here.
The trouble comes when you see a phrase like “not statistically significant.”. You can’t remember the definition of “not statistically significant’, so you read it as “not significant”. That omission changes the meaning entirely, and gives you completely the wrong idea.
Somewhat on point I'd say. I have an almost eiditic memory but it's beginning to fail over the years, and I have found myself struggling harder through the number sheets recently. In any case, you are right I couldn't produce the underlying math, but I'm competent enough to read the MBAs' analysis of it and make projections based on it. Though you caught me, it's not my favorite thing to do and I groan when I have to see it.
I undersand what "not statistically significant means". You are making the opposite fallacy though and assuming that because there is a difference, it means its significant. That's not how anyone interpreted the study, and I even showed you an exposition (from an MD no less) showing you why you are wrong. I also showed you in the same interpetation why that's a very bad place to even start the inquiry. Because the study started with instructions given to people on how to wear the mask. Because the study handed out surgical masks and the instruction was to replace often. And because the study didn't take into account the cloth masks and bandanas that people wear. The acutal real world circumstance are WORSE than the study, so if you are starting from not statistically significant it's bad. That's why all you blue pillers are so anxious to dunk on the study, and everyone outside your bubble knows it. And that's from a middle of the road, fair critique that I cited...I could cite others but you'd dismiss them as partisan sources.
But that's the problem with you. You are clinging for dear life so terrified to that blue pill that you engage in goalpost moving, straw men, mischaracterizing others statements, and even cry ad hominem when you yourself start engaging in it (and started it). You are so terrified of losing your blue pill and the illusion of control that you'll do anything and everything to alter the reality around you and preserve your illusion. It's sad.
p.s. there's a reason they have people like me (or with differing degrees, such as psychologists, law, finance and even fine arts) look at the comps and make the calls. They've found the numbers people like you are really bad at it. One of my mentor's (the one that gave me my first break) was a wiz at them....had a BA from a no name college somewhere, worked her way up from the secretarial pool in a boys only club industry, and was looked down by the numbers guys that someone like her got to judge their work....she was a great at it (always right).
Reread your second paragraph. You're still conflating statistical significance with significance.
Statistical significance is not how you measure the strength of a potential correlation. If you want to do that, you need different tools and a much larger study.