Message from @Whithers
Discord ID: 786428472510644235
"Results Infectious disease mortality declined during the first 8 decades of the 20th century from 797 deaths per 100,000 in 1900 to 36 deaths per 100,000 in 1980. From 1981 to 1995, the mortality rate increased to a peak of 63 deaths per 100,000 in 1995 and declined to 59 deaths per 100,000 in 1996. "
@MatiLuc This is more like part 4 or 7. But NYC didn't put up with the efforts there.
sometimes they refer to it as the CHODE
is it something different?
Please note here that especially infections diseases of the OBST-ward (started dropping with antibiotics) had a massive impact on MR, if you measure mortality not in persons, but in lost "lifeyears"
@Phil- I am not sure. How many categories of Chaz do we have to observe for the 72 recognized genders?
@Doc That is an interesting theory, but one cannot measure against what is only theoretically calculable and has never been defined through rigorous controlled and comparative studies.
trump should troll them by letting it stand, maybe he can get some electoral votes
@Phil Prolly not. My genders are I don't give a Martian's flying saucer and ground squirrels eat dinosaurs.
I really think Trump should have worn a Muumuu some April 1 and declared himself the first woman president.
youd have to rephrase
what kind of study do you suppose for Mortality? an RCT?
because what you see above is supported by large naturalistic comparatives.
@Whithers yeah i heard that he could do that before the inauguration if it doesn't go well for him
@Doc You cannot know what life years are lost. There is no experience of what did not occur. Everything in the mathematical projection is merely mathematical projection and not observed reality.
what is your point?
we do not measure counterfacts.
No it is not all medical statistics. Only those.
well, then how would you design a study of Mortaliy?
You can only prove what is positive experience. I am not saying the other is without value - but in Western Logic it has no validity as a truth claim. It has not existed. One cannot posit a value on the vastness of the void. It is an absence of evidence. Without the experience of the evidence, a conclusion is only supposition.
speaking of statistics ... with the sample size of the duplicated ballots they did in AZ, the projection onto the entire population of duplicated ballots of the results from the sample is within 3 percent of true with 99 percent confidence level ... assuming random sampling etc.
@Whithers There is no such thing as evidence in science. Epistemology 101.
I think you're waxing philosophical here when there's no real reason to
In near Eastern logic one can ask,"All though it is impossible, what if ... ?" But in Western Logic, hence science, that speculation into what can not be observed is not evidentiary. @Doc
I told you. You can only look at the real. You cannot project what did not occur.
That answer makes no sense.
Describe the methodology, please?
@Whithers we want to study the mortality among 20-25 year old females in Canada. What research design do you suppose?
@Doc <Hands Doc an empty plate> Enjoy your speculated cheeseburger and fries. 🙁
its fine to use life years, its not projecting.
No, it isn't. And I hate it when corporations pull that same math BS. "I choose to expect to make 1 trillion dollars this year!" Oops, I only made 1 billion, so I have a 99 billion dollar loss to file for my taxes.
yes it is
this is pretty much what science does, it builds models fit what we observe and turns the dials on the models to see what we can expect if we change the input ... folks can argue about how useful it is but doing so on a discord chat whose very existence depends on numerous technologies all brought to you by that same model building seems counter-productive to say the least