You oughta know Daffy....But it just takes one fool to believe the hype and spread it to likeminded fools.
You oughta know Daffy....But it just takes one fool to believe the hype and spread it to likeminded fools.
Which is till we’ll above your standards!
About half the population of Illinois is in the Chicago area. And over half the population of California is in the giant urban blob around LA.It's states not cities, like FL and TX.
Yep…got me again…but you get the point….Autocorrect?
are you attempting to describe the CDC and the FDA?There are think tanks running test groups, there are experts in data manipulation, there are scientists paid to skew research, there are media outlets looking for brand loyalty and more clicks etc etc. Navigating through that kind of gauntlet isn’t for the impressionable and weak minded. Speaking of, the internet and social media is packed with experts on a variety of subjects that decide what they want to believe despite what actual professionals and real life experts say. What a world we live in!
sound familiar? Remember when fools spread the word that vaccines provided immunity and prevented transmission? Was that scientifically backed or a manipulation of data by experts? a basic misunderstanding of what they were looking at? or was it financially driven?But it just takes one fool to believe the hype and spread it to likeminded fools.
Excellent rebuttal Q. Did you hear about the snake venom? Bat, Monkey, Human, Bird and now Snake. The List keeps growing. No need to go to one of those Brazilian BBQ and all you can eat meat place. It's in the blood now. Plus plastic. Blood clot is the new normal. Bell Palsy is through the roof. Not fun when you can't feel half your face. I am praying for everyone you guys. All of us are in this together. I am here for those who need help or someone to talk to. We will get through this together.are you attempting to describe the CDC and the FDA?
You've just described the last two years.It appears that you agree that the factors can be adjusted to yield the desired result.
About half the population of Illinois is in the Chicago area. And over half the population of California is in the giant urban blob around LA.
If you are looking at disease and disease control measures, that’s what matters. The CA disease and economy results weren’t driven by Redding.
And as I mentioned those adjustments tended to work against red states in the study. Some favor smoke and red herrings over reality.No, I'm looking at the study we are discussing. You did read the study, right? If so, you would know adjustments were made for population, age, obesity, diabetes - to name a few.
If I were trying to create a study to argue for red state covid policies, I also would correct for population, age, obesity and diabetes. (Watfly has it flipped on the last three. If something hyour side, correcting for it makes your side look better.)No, I'm looking at the study we are discussing. You did read the study, right? If so, you would know adjustments were made for population, age, obesity, diabetes - to name a few.
You have it flipped. If group A has some disadvantage, then correcting for it makes group A look better.And as I mentioned those adjustments tended to work against red states in the study. Some favor smoke and red herrings over reality.
If I were trying to create a study to argue for red state covid policies, I also would correct for population, age, obesity and diabetes. (Watfly has it flipped on the last three. If something hyour side, correcting for it makes your side look better.)
I would not correct for population density, multi-family households, timing of first wave, or dominant variant.
They’re playing the game of “cheat at statistics“, and they’re playing it about five levels above your head.
You have it flipped. If group A has some disadvantage, then correcting for it makes group A look better.
Best example of this is Florida. Florida looks pretty bad on raw covid numbers. Their large elderly population puts them at a disadvantage. Once you correct for age, they look a lot better. The correction removed the disadvantage.
You could do the same thing for LA. LA has the disadvantage of multi-family low income households. If you correct for multi-family homes, LA will look better. Same thing: the correction removes the disadvantage.
Cherry picking again. Look at the actual results. For the top 10 overall there were 5 red states significantly disadvantaged by the study's Covid adjustments. There were 4 red states and the one blue state that were slightly advantaged by the studies adjustments.If I were trying to create a study to argue for red state covid policies, I also would correct for population, age, obesity and diabetes. (Watfly has it flipped on the last three. If something hyour side, correcting for it makes your side look better.)
I would not correct for population density, multi-family households, timing of first wave, or dominant variant.
They’re playing the game of “cheat at statistics“, and they’re playing it about five levels above your head.
You have it flipped. If group A has some disadvantage, then correcting for it makes group A look better.
Best example of this is Florida. Florida looks pretty bad on raw covid numbers. Their large elderly population puts them at a disadvantage. Once you correct for age, they look a lot better. The correction removed the disadvantage.
You could do the same thing for LA. LA has the disadvantage of multi-family low income households. If you correct for multi-family homes, LA will look better. Same thing: the correction removes the disadvantage.
Cherry picking again. Look at the actual results. For the top 10 overall there were 5 red states significantly disadvantaged by the study's Covid adjustments. There were 4 red states and the one blue state that were slightly advantaged by the studies adjustments.
Again more smoke and mirrors and red herrings.
I get it, you don't like the results, but don't mischaracterize what the results say. Studies are observations based on a particular methodology. Studies as we have found out aren't necessarily facts. Prospective studies are guesstimates at best. Historical studies have far more credibility. As of now you have failed to show that the Covid adjustments favored red states. Sorry but calling the study authors "wingnuts" or mischaracterizing the results of the study doesn't prove your case, it actually diminishes the credibility of your argument.