Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe it's true, but there are personality and emotional issues much at play as well. This doesn't need a study to be observed. Just watching the videos from stores and postings on social media and forums is enough.
They will shoot themselves in the foot over this. If putting a piece of cloth over your nose and mouth during a viral pandemic is the hill you want to die on, fine. Just don't complain about any unintended consequences.
This definitely plays a part. I’ve never been very good at doing what I was told, lol. And I question everything. These days I might be diagnosed with adult oppositional defiance disorder.
Well...…………….. I am a conservative and not only advocate, but practice social distancing. We have cancelled two vacations since the onset of the pandemic.
There are plenty of people on the left who put on the tinfoil hats for this pandemic. It's not necessarily right or left. Contact tracing has people up in arms as an example. Both the left and right do not trust scientists, doctors, think vaccines will kill, cause autism, etc.
Yes, I see that with the JHU study uses very incomplete data to arrive at a conclusion, meaning the conclusion is of minimal value.
Here's an analogy:
We studied 1000 people who noted they were bitten by mosquitoes, and 5% had a very strong allergic reaction. Thus, we conclude that .5% of people are extremely allergic to mosquitoes. What is missing is the thousands of people who were bitten by mosquitoes and never even knew it. Factor that in, and a significantly smaller percentage of people are extremely allergic. You do see THAT, don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC
[/b]
What? Statistics are my thing.
Why did you go from 5% to .5%?
Statistics are your thing? I’ll explain:
If 5% of 1000 people are extremely allergic, which was the example I used, that represents .5% of the sample. If on the other hand, 5% of 100 people are, THEN it is 5%.
If 5% of 1000 people are extremely allergic, which was the example I used, that represents .5% of the sample. If on the other hand, 5% of 100 people are, THEN it is 5%.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 7 days ago)
35,629 posts, read 17,961,729 times
Reputation: 50652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976
Statistics are your thing? I’ll explain:
If 5% of 1000 people are extremely allergic, which was the example I used, that represents .5% of the sample. If on the other hand, 5% of 100 people are, THEN it is 5%.
No.
You're saying 5% of the 1000 people, not 5 of the 1000 people.
It's just an inattention error, I get it, but thought maybe you were making a different point.
And you're still not getting it. 5% of a thousand people is not .5% of thousand people, which is what you keep saying.
You're saying 5% of the 1000 people, not 5 of the 1000 people.
It's just an inattention error, I get it, but thought maybe you were making a different point.
And you're still not getting it. 5% of a thousand people is not .5% of thousand people, which is what you keep saying.
And yes, statistics are my thing.
Yep, I see what you're saying. It's just an inattention error- a blip while typing fast on the go.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
