That table still gives a very different impression than the media. Should the public be trusted with such easily accessed data?
Printable View
It was obviously a mistake to publish this.
Always cracks me up when people make an appeal to authority argument. I like the following jokes that apply in this situation.
Do you know what you call someone who graduates last in their class in medical school?
Doctor.
Do you know that 50% of all doctors graduate in the bottom half of their class?
It was the greed of the Borgia Popes that gave impetus to the Reformation. Selling Indulgences (get out of Purgatory sooner like carbon credits) pissed off enough Germans, thanks of Cardinal Tetzel, that when Luther got antsy, he got the support of enough of the nobility to stay off the rack.
The printing press simply gave the Reformation the information and distribution channel to collect enough adherents that they couldn't be wiped out like the Albigensians did.
Very good Barry.
An argument can be made for a flu-season mask law. It would demonstrably save many lives, if masks are as effective as claimed.
I’m up for the experiment. Statistical significance would take up to a decade. Ten flu seasons to roughly increase the SNR by ~ 3 (root 10).
Perhaps there’d be a more uniform response if there was more uniform reporting. Cannot the news agencies simply self-organize and agree to directly link to that top level CDC data and couch their reporting in terms of it? Either in terms of decreases or potential increases? Add an arbitrary # of caveats. Say “that data does not yet include *our* data” or somesuch.
A baseline, a touchstone, a common figure-of-merit.