Reply With QuoteSee you are dull. You cannot grasp that I don't give a toss about your 'renowned' critical thinking and that I will not debate it with you.
Apply your critical thinking to that statement
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I've applied critical thinking to your premise that some people who are "anti-drink" hold a "dispropotionate influence" in Wales. The first step of that is to ask who these people are. You'd be a bit dull not to ask that question wouldn't you?Originally Posted by xsnaggle
See you are dull. You cannot grasp that I don't give a toss about your 'renowned' critical thinking and that I will not debate it with you.
Apply your critical thinking to that statement
So these people exist only in your head? Sorted.
Pass, I've just gone back to look for you and that Yankee site is now asking me to log on, it originally allowed me to see it but not now (I wonder if they want money or summit, blydi capitalists), mathematical equations all over the place, deep stuff.
It seems like they are not impressed with a 2 out of 3 ratio, because of the accuracy range which seemed to be averaged out at 70, I personally think it's pathetic effort for a test to have such low accuracy, a little like weathermen, you know if you say the weather will be the same tomorrow as it is today you would be right more often than the weather forecasters (well they used to say that used to be the case, don't think anything has changed).
Yes, but my question shows it isn't as clear cut as a weather person getting the weather wrong 70% of the time. It's also lacking an article from the science community, as far as I can tell.
Basically saying a test result is x% accurate is meaningless in my opinion.
You need to know if it is specific or sensitive. The other thing that is missing here is the base rate - which is what we don't know with covid. The base rate will be different dependent on if you are testing only symptomatic or sick people, or if you are testing the whole population. If you are only testing people who you believe have it, then the false negative rate will be higher (in other words, the specificity of the test becomes skewed towards the 70% figure you are quoting).
If you are testing people who most likely don't have it, then you have more potential of false positive tests. However, there is no way of knowing that a test subject definitely doesn't have the virus.
I put very little weight on the 70% accuracy figures based on the above, and also on the lack of citation from the science community.
Have you seen the WSJ article ?
No, I was waiting for a link.
I've told you how to find it and I can't get in now, I only wanted to find references to the 70% thing for you which I did, I only glanced at the Wall Street thing and it was all algebra, logarithms, equations etc, I don't know but I would be surprised if it did not meet your criteria.
I seen an expert on TV saying something along the lines of if somebody has the full blown symptoms he would be 90% certain that person has it yet the test we were using was only 70% accurate, and he apparently is an expert and he was talking about the 70% success rate or should that be ,30% failure rate.
I have found it. The table is based on 70% sensitivity and 95% specifity. It doesn't take into account the unknown base rates, and it is based on a report from China that tests could have a 70% sensitivity rate.
The article is also a month old, but that is not my issue with the 70% figure. My issue is that, without knowing the base rate of the sub population being tested, and without considering there will be more false negatives if tests are only carried out on a population based on the assumption that the subject is likely to have covid at the time of testing.
You disbelieve the 70% figure ?
What base rate are you talking about ?
Do you know if they did or didn't take the unknown base rate into consideration ?
As I said earlier, the 70% accuracy is not relevant unless we know what the base rate is. And, with this virus, we won't know the base rate. Ergo, I am not putting any value on the 70% accuracy. Of course, if you can provide links that show the specificity and sensitivity of the various tests, based on different populations and with a known base rate, I am open minded enough to have my mind changed.
I have shown why I am skeptical about the 70% figure, can you explain why you are certain the figure is correct?
Also what is sensitivity and specificty in the context you are using it ?
I've been looking but I still cannot find any information on how one volunteers to be one of the 'army' of people to monitor this tracing app. No info on it what so ever!
Can anyone steer me in the right direction?
Is there a Welsh government hotline or something?
No no butt, you have showed Porthcawl.
What is this base rate you refer too ?
What is specificty and sensitivity you refer too ?
If you are not putting a value on anything then your posts are meaningless, if you have no idea if the accuracy of the tests are very close to the 70% figure often routinely quoted, or if they are higher or lower, then you going on about the testing accuracy is pointless.
I'm not saying the figure is or isn't correct but it seems to be widely accepted, you dispute it yet you don't say if in your view the figure should be higher or lower.
My sister is doing it, they’ve moved people who were doing the phones onto the app.
A sensitive test will correctly identify people with covid. Sensitivity measures correct positive results.
If a test is 90 percent sensitive, it will correctly identify 90 percent of people who are infected. However, 10 percent of people who are infected and tested would get a false negative result—they have the virus, but the test said they don’t.
A specific test will accurately identify people without covid-19. Specificity measures correct negatives.
If a test is 90 percent specific, it will correctly identify 90 percent of people who are not infected. However, 10 percent of people who are not infected will test positive for the virus and receive a false positive.
I just don’t understand what’s made you think this? The majority of the country loves a pub whatever class they are and they bring in a lot of money.
The only reason they aren’t open is because of the virus.
Seriously what people in positions of power don’t want them open?
I have already explained what the base rate is, and how not knowing the base rate (which we don't) will effectively mean the "70% accuracy" figure is meaningless.
I have also explained how, in testing only people believed to have the infection, we will get a higher number of false negatives by the very nature of the testing parameters.
I have explained, in a few posts, why I am not giving too much credence to the 70% accuracy figure. You haven't explained (other than "a lot of people say so, but I can't tell you who") why you are putting a lot of credence into the 70% accuracy figure.
What is the base rate you refer too ???
Drakeford makes no sense, he said a few weeks ago he was waiting for 5 key points to occur, which they already are, yet instead of easing the lock down he hasn’t. He wants to be like New Zealand now, despite the fact they were in lockdown for less time than us, I didn’t realise Wales was an island 500 miles off the coast of England either.....the blundering fool is going to see thousands on the dole I tell u and then we will get two fingers back from boris......
EEFF0974-5D63-4692-A4DD-7E01B81942AD.jpg
Big day tomorrow!
There are certain kinds of folks who think that pubs are 'the devil's work' and by and large they tend to be people of a certain kind, religious in a very strict way, or just dour and miserable themselves, products of strict wesleyan type upbringings who tend to think that if someone is enjoying himself its not good. It sounds silly but it is actually true. There are several people just like it in Llandaff where I live who have stopped the local club (which is sponsored by the cathedral) and the pub playing live music (so the club cannot now do wedding receptions for example) tried to shut the local Chinese restaurant and stopped a takeaway from selling kebabs on the pretext it would attract the "wrong kind" most of the members of Llandaff council are of this ilk.. There are people who call the police and complain bout the pubs regularly. When one of the publicans changed a frosted glass window for a sheet glass one to let more light in he was made to replace the frosted glass so "Respectable people passing by didn't have to see men drinking".
Sadly these people seem to be person who can influence the powers that be to do their bidding. Two of the people who do it in Llandaff are high court judges.
I agree with you that they are just like Gyms etc which will also be amongst the last to re open but you don't really need a gym to exercise but you do need a pub in a community context. Whether an individual chooses to attend is for him or her.
I will not hold my breath on pubs reopening in Wales until there are so many day trips to England that it becomes silly.
Sadly these people do actually exist!! Just my opinion as I say. And its not a debating point, but lets wait and see.
I agree with you that the majority love a pub but sadly we are not ruled by the majority. The only reason they are closed is because of the virus and its a good excuse for some people to lobby to keep them closed.
Does your sister have a contact number about the tracing thing, for my boy?
Your opinion is incorrect you’ll be pleased to hear.
We shall see lol
Posting Permissions