Re:$5 device accurately tests for breast cancer in under 5 s...
by renewiltord on Friday February 16, 2024 @02:29PM
(#39401822)
This is why science has gotten harder these days. When there were only half a billion people, sampling 500 got you 1 in a million coverage. Now there are 8 billion people, so it's worth 16 times less. As more people are made, science will suffer because the percentage is so much less. In fact, this is why I always trust science in small towns more. In Colma, for instance, you sample 500 and you have covered 33% of the people. Sometimes, it's even better to just sample people in one house. 100% coverage.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:$5 device accurately tests for breast cancer in under 5 s...
by hn_throwaway_99 on Friday February 16, 2024 @02:51PM
(#39402084)
TBH, I can't tell if this is sarcastic or not, because there is so much in this comment that belies a fundamental misunderstanding of statistical testing and statistical power, which is the point I was trying to make.
> Now there are 8 billion people, so it's worth 16 times less.
That is not how statistics works, at all.
> In fact, this is why I always trust science in small towns more. In Colma, for instance, you sample 500 and you have covered 33% of the people.
These are the sentences that made me think this had to be satire (presumably you want "science" to apply to places outside of Colma...), but in all honesty these days it's really hard to tell.