3 ms·
“Problems you want to have“ are still problems, after all. It’s just, which would you rather have: a perfectly run trial because your vaccine efficacy is so lo
by hprotagonist 5y ago
“Problems you want to have“ are still problems, after all.
It’s just, which would you rather have: a perfectly run trial because your vaccine efficacy is so low that your control group doesn’t feel incentivized to get vaccinated? Or a vaccine that works well enough to quell a pandemic, causing your control group to jump ship and potentially lessen your statistical power?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- H8crilA 5y agoThere was a comment here that got deleted. It had something cool I haven't seen before: a risk calculator/estimator for Covid (both death and hospital admission), for the UK: https://qcovid.org/Calculation https://qcovid.org/Calculation
- chiefalchemist 5y agoInteresting. Especially that it uses a number of different "properties" (e.g., post code) to "fine tune" the calculation.
- guscost 5y agoEither way, the higher-order effects will continue and cascade in perpetuity. The world is not a well-controlled experiment, and if you think there is an obvious “better” choice here which can be separated from all the context, then you have no idea how the world works.
- hprotagonist 5y agoand if you think all choices are obviously bad (because there's no discernable 'better'), then i don't want you running a public health office. (disclaimer: i've run experiments with patients, i'm well aware of how messy the world is)
- guscost 5y ago> i'm well aware of how messy the world is No, you are not. Not even close.