4 ms·

> Are they going to ban politicians from discussing budget charts or crime statistics in public debates if they decide that it's misleading with no objective ba

> Are they going to ban politicians from discussing budget charts or crime statistics in public debates if they decide that it's misleading with no objective basis? I’m assuming the “government database” is VEARS, which is using raw, unverified data. It would be like if someone took NextDoor or Shotspotter reports to derive crime statistics.

gjsman-1000 5y ago
To be fair to VAERS, a doctor needs to fill it out, and the doctor is not paid to do so. It’s not exactly a user-submitted database.
- jdavis703 5y ago
  I’ve also complained to my doctor about undocumented “side effects” from various non-vaccine drugs. Even though it seemed weird he immediately suggested switching to something else. Doctors don’t apply a robotic “this could never happen” approach when dealing with unexpected side effects, regardless of whether there’s empirical evidence for them or not.
- alwayseasy 5y ago
  That's simply not true. A doctor can fill it out for you but can't refuse if you ask him to. You can also do it yourself online... it's the main reason people are spamming the database. Here is the direct link: https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index.jsp https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index.jsp
logicalmonster 5y ago
Imperfect data is still useful for understanding the world, is it not? To use your example: I'm not completely sure that Shotspotter reports are 100% accurate, but I'd be hesitant to move to a neighborhood that was reported to have a steady burst of gunshots, wouldn't you? In fact, speaking on data, couldn't we say that almost all data is imperfect to some extent? Isn't this especially true of Covid-related data?
- jdavis703 5y ago
  ShotSpotter is notoriously inaccurate… It can pick up fireworks and engine backfires. If you happen to live by say a motorcycle club, ShotSpotter might make your block seem far more dangerous than it actually is.
  - logicalmonster 5y ago
    Your comment is interesting and informative but doesn't really answer the question. Knowing that some data is imperfect, can it still be a useful data point for understanding the world? Is it unreasonable to use ShotSpotter as a tool in your toolbox for understanding the world just because we believe it to be imperfect?
    - jdavis703 5y ago
      No data source is perfect. In the absence of other data, it’s reasonable to use the least imperfect data source. But for example police will confirm ShotSpotter by locating shell casings, witness statements or EMS/hospital reports, so it’s better to look at aggravated assault and homicide data from the police to draw conclusions. Likewise for VAERS it makes more sense to look at the abundant amounts of analyzed information, or else provide a critique for why existing analysis was wrong. Presenting low-quality data without caveats or explanation to disprove higher-quality information seems to fall within the realm of misinformation.

gjsman-1000 5y ago

To be fair to VAERS, a doctor needs to fill it out, and the doctor is not paid to do so. It’s not exactly a user-submitted database.

jdavis703 5y ago
I’ve also complained to my doctor about undocumented “side effects” from various non-vaccine drugs. Even though it seemed weird he immediately suggested switching to something else. Doctors don’t apply a robotic “this could never happen” approach when dealing with unexpected side effects, regardless of whether there’s empirical evidence for them or not.
alwayseasy 5y ago
That's simply not true. A doctor can fill it out for you but can't refuse if you ask him to. You can also do it yourself online... it's the main reason people are spamming the database. Here is the direct link: https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index.jsp https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index.jsp

logicalmonster 5y ago

Imperfect data is still useful for understanding the world, is it not? To use your example: I'm not completely sure that Shotspotter reports are 100% accurate, but I'd be hesitant to move to a neighborhood that was reported to have a steady burst of gunshots, wouldn't you? In fact, speaking on data, couldn't we say that almost all data is imperfect to some extent? Isn't this especially true of Covid-related data?

jdavis703 5y ago
ShotSpotter is notoriously inaccurate… It can pick up fireworks and engine backfires. If you happen to live by say a motorcycle club, ShotSpotter might make your block seem far more dangerous than it actually is.
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  Your comment is interesting and informative but doesn't really answer the question. Knowing that some data is imperfect, can it still be a useful data point for understanding the world? Is it unreasonable to use ShotSpotter as a tool in your toolbox for understanding the world just because we believe it to be imperfect?
  - jdavis703 5y ago
    No data source is perfect. In the absence of other data, it’s reasonable to use the least imperfect data source. But for example police will confirm ShotSpotter by locating shell casings, witness statements or EMS/hospital reports, so it’s better to look at aggravated assault and homicide data from the police to draw conclusions. Likewise for VAERS it makes more sense to look at the abundant amounts of analyzed information, or else provide a critique for why existing analysis was wrong. Presenting low-quality data without caveats or explanation to disprove higher-quality information seems to fall within the realm of misinformation.