3 ms·

You are recommending something over nothing despite not being confident in the data about your recommendation? Which vaccines were in "both vaccines?" An mRNA

• wizzwizz4 5y ago
  > You are recommending something over nothing despite not being confident in the data about your recommendation? (Not OP but) Yes. Reasoning despite uncertainty is entirely possible; if you want a mathematical formalism, look into Bayesian statistics.
  • adolph 5y ago
    I don’t think Laplace would call reasoning without data (the commenter’s avowed position) Bayesian.
    • wizzwizz4 5y ago
      Zero data of the effects after three years. Plenty of data about the effects after one. It's not “reasoning without data”; it's reasoning without as much data as one would have liked. Are you doing this on purpose?
      • adolph 5y ago
        The commenter did not say the results of one year were under consideration. They described a state of recommendation without information. Besides, March to July isn’t even half a year for phase 3 trials. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04811664 https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04811664
        • faeriechangling 5y ago
          I did mention inferences. You seem to be concerned that I don't maintain a state of complete agnosticism in any matter which I lack data for, but it's really hard to do so in practice in a world of distinct choices. Most everybody will either get vaccinated or not get vaccinated and at least have made an implicit prediction about the future. Since I was pressured into making that choice it seems hardly surprising that I'm willing to opine on this issue where I lack data.