Maybe, but look at the statistics. It always seems
Posted By: to be these macho control freaks doing this. on 2009-02-27
In Reply to: Sorry, women do bad things like this also - Marg
nm
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Statistics - sm
A healthy skepticism about statistics is certainly warranted. If you want the details behind the numbers, I suppose you can write to the source.
The problem is, if you're going to insist that every story that uses statistics must include the data set that was used to derive them, either the daily newspaper would be as thick as the Encyclopedia Britannica or it would have to exclude a considerable proportion of the articles that mention numbers.
Do you require that a newspaper article that analyzes the 8700 different earmarks in the latest federal budget and makes statements, for instance, that "about 60% of them will create no jobs at all", must then publish the budget along with it, or even that it provide specific reference to each and every earmark and whether it was classified as "a job producer" or "nonproducer"? Or, do you go yourself to the federal budget, find and classify each earmark and compare your findings with the article? I'm guessing not.
Obviously, you need a better strategy than merely being "suspicious of statistics", especially if that means rejecting them out of hand. And I'd bet a good portion of the farm that you will find, if you are honest with yourself, that you apply this suspicion rather selectively to do just that - reject information that you don't happen to "like". That, or you must be missing out on a great deal of information.
I'm well aware of the statistics but
that's all they are. You cannot make factual claims based on statistics. I personally know of people with both pancreatic and ovarian cancer. While the survival rates are grim, there are survivors. Furthermore, the claim stated that he had 5 weeks to live. Since when does a doctor stick an expiration tag on someone like that? I've worked for several oncologists and not one patient was ever given an expiration date as exact as that.
Treatments do work and can shrink the size of someone's cancer, thereby increasing their survival rate and prolonging their life. Your chance of survival is also based on many factors: lifestyle, hereditary factors, early detection, methods of prevention, etc. While many may eventually succumb to the disease, still some do survive. I would never spread spread rumors with my source being a gossip column. What does the name tell you?
pitbull statistics
The statistics which appear to show a high rate of attacks due to alleged “pit bull-type dogs” are full of inaccuracy simply because any dog that can pass for a “pit bull” will be called a “pit bull” by the media.
And yes, American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Staffordshire Bull Terriers are often referred to by the slang term “pit bull,” but were these the actual breeds responsible for the attacks? Probably not since a slew of other breeds of dog — like Presa Canarios, Cane Corsos, Spanish Alanos, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, Bandogs, Dogues Brasileiros, Dogo Argentino, Guatemalan Bull Terriers, American Bulldogs, Boxers, Bull Mastiffs, Bull Terriers, English Bulldogs, and even Labradors, Rottweilers, Akitas, and Chow Chows — have also been labeled “pit bulls.” Statistics are inaccurate because they are not based on “reliable breed-specific population data”
Still, it is a testament to the quality of the breed that even though many are unsocialized, tortured, and otherwise ill-used, very few are human-aggressive. I hesitate even to include abuse as a factor since even when they are abused most bullies are incredibly friendly and loving towards humans. You can thank over a hundred years of proper breeding for this trait.
There is no scientific evidence that one breed of dog is more vicious than another.
I personally don't know the statistics, but -
I'm certain that not everybody who was not circumcised has problems. I chose not to have my son circumcised. Thinking of inflicting that kind of pain on a baby fresh out of the womb gives me the willies. My son's 19 and has never had a problem. My first husband also. There is the thought that if God didn't want there to be a foreskin, why is it there?
Call the state in question Vital Statistics Bureau - sm
and ask them. There should only be one website to go to if you go that route and that is the state in which you were born; I would not use a "service" that does this, go to the source.
Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
|
