2 ms·
My summary is when betting on any test with a low positive rate take under not the over. Saying at least this many people have been infected, wrong. Better. At
by Gibbon1 7y ago
My summary is when betting on any test with a low positive rate take under not the over.
Saying at least this many people have been infected, wrong.
Better. At most this many people have been infected.
Reminds me of a survey 15 years ago that said something like 2-3% of black people approved of the job the president was doing. That 2-3% was more likely 'rectified noise'.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y agoIn normal times, where there aren't critically urgent decisions to be made, that's the right approach. We don't have that luxury right now; we're continually charting the path forward, and if we don't have clean data then we'll need to chart it with unclean data. And I think it's hard to argue that this study is worse than our existing case data, which is simply a daily aggregate of the number of new positive PCR tests labs report they've run. That's not even attempting to be a statistically valid estimate.