Lets actually have a rebuttal. Nothing about how it is someone else’s problem. Or there were no links.
Just a good discussion where you use your own logic. Nothing about what you studied in your Ph.D program or you linked from a journal.
Your own thoughts. Your own logic. Not how someone else is below you. Or someone failed.
Just you.
You are right. I don’t even understand your posts.
No we aren’t. Statistics can be used for hypothesis testing, such as using a t-test to determine whether mortality rates of patients with older doctors are different from those of younger doctors. That is not modeling.
Statistical modeling is used to provide a mathematical description of something that can be used to make inferences about the future. Health insurance companies set their premiums using statistical models that predict future risks.
A rebuttal of what? Everything you’ve posted are just personal attacks and hysterics. How do you rebut an emotional breakdown? To be honest, I am feeling more sympathy for you than a need to rebut. I am dropping out of this thread as I don’t think this is healthy for you. Seriously, go take a walk and experience the real world. This virtual one is not worth getting all worked up about.
Here is research that is self explanatory. It passes any sniff test. The public looks at this and wonders why it was ever funded.
It is useful for public works projects.
You were not spoon fed.
All of it is modeling when we get into stats.
You have none of your own logic.
Rebutting the study on older doctors having a higher mortality rate than younger doctors.
The reason understanding the fallibility of research projects and the statistical modeling is important.
@btresist
Rebut those two issues. Your own thoughts.
How old are you?
That was your Ph.D training?
Note for others…
I just realized when he is dense in his offline world people get very angry at him. I fell into that.
Just a reminder that you can ignore select posters.
This thread has become useless especially regarding the OP.
I am going to do that.
No one should be that dense in these discussions.
I am also going to ignore the other one. This is not the first time she has gone on and on and then admitted my point was correct.
WTH,
There is some fraud. My point was only meant as a rider. The research is experimental and often wrong. The point was made, but the garbage that it took to make the simple point was a shame.
I think that, once again, you’re mistaken. One of my earliest responses in this thread (still there for anyone interested to gape at) emphasized the difference between fraud and “wrongness”…the latter being inherent in novel research and hypothesis testing.
The problem arises when folk who don’t understand this glom onto any publication that appears to validate their opinions. Or who imagine that what they read in the popular press reporting the latest institutional press release (my oft mentioned but frequently ignored SBPR criticism over on the H&N board) is a QED rather than a preliminary, pre-peer review finding.
Crap all the ignore button does is “hide” the post.
You are into I am mistaken for some reason. The other poster has premised every last thing he thinks on the stats in those studies. That is not how medicine practiced at all. You kept getting in between us.
Scientific studies are often wrong. They are not the basis for medical treatments. I do get it some of it will stick as useful treatments. The amount that is misdirection is staggering. Diagnostics are not done that way. Doctors constantly have to dissuade people who read those studies. Med schools avoid the studies mostly. Or at least constantly tell students not to bank on them.
There is a great deal of confusion for the other poster who is banking on the crap as knowledge in these discussions. It is dense. Or as we Irish would say thick.
I gave you a like for your response because you know better.
To other posters if you sit opposite an oncologist with a cancer diagnosis you will start reading research reports. It is human nature. The doctor will constantly be having to subtly dismiss MOST OF IT. That is a very serious matter. It goes for much of medicine depending on how much you research different topics.
VeeEnn, I was very annoyed yesterday.
I recommend a less aggressive energy deficit…or think twice about posting while dieting…or follow through on your intention to ignore selected posts
There can be full justifications for being annoyed.
You really need to find one of your children to impart your wisdom. Other people expressing themselves in public are not your children.
If I am a bull in a china shop I could care less.
Dumb stuff is really dumb stuff.
I do not suffer fools gladly.
BTW if I was parenting people here…“the people with a medical background that run into a lot of posts here do so behind their degrees but are saying half behinded stuff. They need to really increase how intelligent they are before boasting about their degrees. Their grammar and spelling are not a problem. The content is devoid of any quality. Just rambling on self-congratulatory. There is no focus except on studies that are trite and meaningless to their own bodies. Their focus on what they know is self-centered instead of helpful”.
That is not addressed to anyone. Do not tell me how to behave in public. Two can play at that. Find someone else who wants to be your child. Or I will parent you in public from now on. Shut it.
