You do not refute the findings of my study, I note. It is not an analysis of a cherrypicked subgroup, but looks at the whole population.
I note your Cureus study is on prison inmates, who likely have very differing behaviour to the general population and I’d hesitate to extrapolate. They found a non-significant difference between vaxed an…
You do not refute the findings of my study, I note. It is not an analysis of a cherrypicked subgroup, but looks at the whole population.
I note your Cureus study is on prison inmates, who likely have very differing behaviour to the general population and I’d hesitate to extrapolate. They found a non-significant difference between vaxed and unvaxed inmates, and only teased out a small significant difference when analysing different age ranges. In research terms this is known as p-hacking, looking at subgroups until hey presto you find one which is different. Here we have a subgroup of a subgroup … certainly not generalisable and the study authors don’t do so and don’t draw firm conclusions, so neither should you.
You do not refute the findings of my study, I note. It is not an analysis of a cherrypicked subgroup, but looks at the whole population.
I note your Cureus study is on prison inmates, who likely have very differing behaviour to the general population and I’d hesitate to extrapolate. They found a non-significant difference between vaxed and unvaxed inmates, and only teased out a small significant difference when analysing different age ranges. In research terms this is known as p-hacking, looking at subgroups until hey presto you find one which is different. Here we have a subgroup of a subgroup … certainly not generalisable and the study authors don’t do so and don’t draw firm conclusions, so neither should you.