[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [IP] Re: D prevention

Hi, Jim.

You wrote:
JH> But statistically it is still a random event with an apparent
JH> probability. An event being unlikely does not prove the converse.
JH> No research has demonstrated anything other than a random events.
JH> But let me repeat -- that only means that we haven't *found* the
JH> correct association(s) yet.

I realize this isn't a statistics course, but could you amplify a bit?

I've never heard of a "random event with an apparent probability".
I've heard of events with unknown causes, but such events are, by
definition, *not* random, since they are distinct from the noise.

Deirdre wrote:
D> If type 1 diabetes occurs in 1 in 300 people, someone has a .33 of
D> a percent chance of having type 1. However, if someone has a
D> sibling with type 1, their odds of having it rise 15 fold to 5%.

Again, please expand on your comments. If Type I were truly random and
someone already had a sibling, then the odds of their next sibling
would remain the same at 1 in 300. But it's not the same -- the odds
fall (not rise) to 1 in 20.

Why isn't this a non-random event in this family? What am I missing?

regards, Andy
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
send a DONATION http://www.Insulin-Pumpers.org/donate.shtml