Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p...
by adolph on Monday July 19, 2021 @08:30PM
(#27888873)
I don’t think Laplace would call reasoning without data (the commenter’s avowed position) Bayesian.
Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p...
by wizzwizz4 on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @08:59AM
(#27893176)
Zero data of the effects after three years. Plenty of data about the effects after one. It's not “reasoning without data”; it's reasoning without as much data as one would have liked.
Are you doing this on purpose?
Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p...
by adolph on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @07:46PM
(#27900652)
The commenter did not say the results of one year were under consideration. They described a state of recommendation without information. Besides, March to July isn’t even half a year for phase 3 trials.
Re:Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until p...
by faeriechangling on Thursday July 22, 2021 @04:13AM
(#27916613)
I did mention inferences.
You seem to be concerned that I don't maintain a state of complete agnosticism in any matter which I lack data for, but it's really hard to do so in practice in a world of distinct choices. Most everybody will either get vaccinated or not get vaccinated and at least have made an implicit prediction about the future. Since I was pressured into making that choice it seems hardly surprising that I'm willing to opine on this issue where I lack data.
(Not OP but) Yes. Reasoning despite uncertainty is entirely possible; if you want a mathematical formalism, look into Bayesian statistics.