Here are the correct numbers for pfizer. It's actually 0.93% risk. 162 cases in unvaccinated, and 8 in vaccinated. Relative risk reduction is 95%. Absolute risk reduction is 0.88% (0.93-0.05). Is there a statisical significance between the two groups?


https://ibb.co/VB29wnD

Do you know what "statistical significant" means?

Do you know why it isn't what is particularly important?

You seem to have accidentally posted the wrong link to the document. The one you posted was a random video from some dude.

Burn your Bible. But read it first.

I support R.A.P.E. Rapid Action for Petroleum Energy. And so should you.

Randomly killing people is only one way to make the world a better place.

Not exactly. Statistics was a module for next year. But i missed out purely because i was the only one in the class that passed the course.
I was the only one out of eight to pass. Hence, i went home with a bachelors degree, couldn't go on to do a masters, and went out into the world as a fairly capable engineer.
Time went on, stats became more boresome and i slid in in the end. I could have been somone. Now i am just a shnook.

I will tell ypu this though. Take another booster which won't be a booster but a new vaccine, then you are a dummy.

I just watched the Olympics swimming event, Mixed 4x100m Medley Relay. They swim back stroke, breast stroke, butterfly, and free style 100m legs. Each team swims 2 women and 2 men and can put them in any legs they want. Amazingly, not every team mixed the women and men the same way. There should be no question which man-woman mix is optimum. My guess is to swim the women in the fastest styles, certainly the free style and I'm guessing the back stroke. Intuitively, the women should tend to swim each style about the same percent slower than the men. So they lose the least absolute time in the fastest styles. When I learned the U.S.A. was swimming their biggest star, a man, as the anchor in the free style I predicted they wouldn't have a chance. Every other team swam a woman in the free style leg. Pretty dumb imo. The U.S. didn't medal.

At least no one slipped and fell like the poor fellow running earlier in the 800 meter heat. Probably because the swimmers don't have to angle into the pack on the inside after a staggered start.


PairTheBoard

Right lads, i have two weeks off work. And this is what I'ma do. I am going to go to the nethedlands. Totally unvaxxed. Mind you, it would be much easier to be vaxxed. Ill keep you updated. There is afterall no way i couod afford to get stranded there but **** it im doing it

Someone was saying this is not the case, and breaststroke has the biggest difference.

So even more vital to swim the men in that leg. An easy solution is to just look at he world records for men and women for the different styles. Swim the women in the styles where the world record man/woman time differences are smallest. I guessed the back stroke and free style.


PairTheBoard

Lucky that GB has the best male 100m breaststroke swimmer.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...21.573285/full

Is the economy that bad there? Being stranded is usually free, or at least quite inexpensive. Ample bridges to sleep under and dumpsters offer free food, even in Eurolandia, from what I've heard.

Where was your quote in the article? I'm afraid I couldn't find it. The closest I found was this from the top of the article:
Clearly, there are a lot of complications, more than I can digest. There seems to be agreement about male on breast stroke. And there's the evidence from the Olympic final where every team swam female on free style except the U.S.

There was this:
The bolded is my theory. But the rest indicates a lot of complicating factors.

There's also this:
Note: "no statistical differences"
Also, my theory plus another factor for male on breast stroke.

Finally:

PairTheBoard

In the paragraph following Figure 1. Sorry, I don't think it was a good quote to pick. Probably better to go with the conclusion:

Have any of you seen a swimming event? It really doesn't translate to TV which makes it look like the swimmers aren't going all that fast but seen live which I have once is incredible. These swimmers are really moving very, very fast.

Thanks. Here's the full paragraph.

Notice the very strong p-value, 0.001, for swimming the men first in the freestyle mixed relay. I think that sums up the effect of all the psychological factors. But those effects are evidently negated in the mixed medley, I suspect because of the gender differential between events.

There's a 6 second difference in male/female world records for the butterfly while a 5 second difference for freestyle. Also, Caeleb Dressel, who the U.S. swam in the freestyle, holds the butterfly world record. However, it's possible the U.S. female freestyle swimmer is more than a second weaker than the U.S. female butterfly swimmer. I can see how generic gender event differentials on the order of 1 second could be negated by other factors, especially in individual cases.


PairTheBoard

I suppose the U.S. butterfly swimmer having the bad luck to lose her goggles at the start of her leg might have also had something to do with the team's finish.


PairTheBoard

It seems to me that the teams probably have access to their actual swimmers' previous times before setting the rosters for relays.

You would rely on data for male/female WR times or average male/female competitive swimmer times if this wasn't available, but when this individual data is available it would be silly to even glance at average or WR times.

You mean, just select whichever legitimate combination of fastest times is the fastest?

The question was whether the advantage is so large for placing the two far slower swimmers (females) in the shorter (time-wise) races as to make it silly to even consider individual data or gender psychology. Suppose the females were half as fast as males for all events - give or take a little for individual data. Suppose males swim the first 3 legs in about 100 seconds each and the last leg in about 50 seconds - give or take a little for individual data. Would you even consider placing a male in the last leg based on individual data? Of course not.


PairTheBoard

I'm apparently missing something. What benefit is gained over the far simpler and far more accurate method of using the individual data?

Yes. Not seeing any downside to the method