2 ms·

Quite right. I remember Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science documenting a few examples. I hope these are the same examples raised in the letter, because otherwise a

by orra 3y ago

Quite right. I remember Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science documenting a few examples. I hope these are the same examples raised in the letter, because otherwise a lot of miscarriage of justice has happened in the UK. What I remember from the book is entirely innocent people jailed because the wrong statistical question was asked. IIRC along the lines of two deaths, and the question asked was what is the chance of this happening? As opposed to, assuming the first death, what is the chance of the second? As opposed to, assuming two deaths, what is the chance of bad luck versus malice. (I am not commenting on the Letby case per se. AIUI there is an appeal pending and UK law can be rather strict. Simply, we should not respond to possible horrible events by convicting other people who are innocent of statistical flukes, or misrepresented statistics.)

DanBC 3y ago
Just for clarity: statistics were not used in the Letby prosecution. The problem with Letby is that a serial killer was able to hide because finding a rare event (a member of staff murdering multiple babies) is hard to do in the noise (the mish mash of data available). Currently the English NHS is moving away from SIRI (Serious Incident Requiring Investigation) to PSIRF (Patient Safety Incident Response Framework) which focuses a lot more on "no blame" and "open culture", so it's important that NHS Trusts get the stats right to be able to detect and understand these very rare events.
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  >> Just for clarity: statistics were not used in the Letby prosecution. I was going to say that this is the second time I see someone in this thread claim this, but I noticed the other comment is also from your account: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37814660 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37814660 As I say in that other comment, statistics were used in Lucy Letby's trial, in the form of the staff duty roster spreadsheet that the prosecution showed to the jurors to convince them that Lucy Letby was a "common denominator" in all the suspicious incidents.
InCityDreams 3y ago
>otherwise a lot of miscarriage of justice has happened in the UK. Depends on 'a lot', but I rather suspect there will be/ will have been fewer, now cops have to use cameras, but yes - a lot of miscarriages of justice has happened in the UK. And every other country.

by orra 3y ago

DanBC 3y ago

Just for clarity: statistics were not used in the Letby prosecution. The problem with Letby is that a serial killer was able to hide because finding a rare event (a member of staff murdering multiple babies) is hard to do in the noise (the mish mash of data available). Currently the English NHS is moving away from SIRI (Serious Incident Requiring Investigation) to PSIRF (Patient Safety Incident Response Framework) which focuses a lot more on "no blame" and "open culture", so it's important that NHS Trusts get the stats right to be able to detect and understand these very rare events.

YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
>> Just for clarity: statistics were not used in the Letby prosecution. I was going to say that this is the second time I see someone in this thread claim this, but I noticed the other comment is also from your account: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37814660 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37814660 As I say in that other comment, statistics were used in Lucy Letby's trial, in the form of the staff duty roster spreadsheet that the prosecution showed to the jurors to convince them that Lucy Letby was a "common denominator" in all the suspicious incidents.

InCityDreams 3y ago

>otherwise a lot of miscarriage of justice has happened in the UK. Depends on 'a lot', but I rather suspect there will be/ will have been fewer, now cops have to use cameras, but yes - a lot of miscarriages of justice has happened in the UK. And every other country.