Jman28
09-14-2005, 07:56 PM
I just started reading 'True Odds' by James Walsh. It seems like it's gonna be a good read. It is about identifying mistakes people make in gathering, interpreting, and analyzing statistics to determine risk in their life.
About 30 pages in I come to what I think is an error. Normally I would just move on I guess, but in a book specifically about correcting statistical errors, a minor mistake in exactly that hurts the books credibility, in my opinon.
Anyways, here's the mistake. Let me know if I'm wrong.
He has the stat that in a given year, the odds that a gay man will contract AIDS is 1 in 245. Since condoms are 90% effective in blocking the transmission of AIDS, he reasons, using a condom every time you have sex will improve a gay mans odds to 1 in 2450.
My main problem with this is that it assumes that no gay man ever uses a condom, clearly a bad assumption.
Also, doesn't the fact that condoms are 90% effective each time used not translate into 90% year long reduction?
Should I even care if this is a mistake?
About 30 pages in I come to what I think is an error. Normally I would just move on I guess, but in a book specifically about correcting statistical errors, a minor mistake in exactly that hurts the books credibility, in my opinon.
Anyways, here's the mistake. Let me know if I'm wrong.
He has the stat that in a given year, the odds that a gay man will contract AIDS is 1 in 245. Since condoms are 90% effective in blocking the transmission of AIDS, he reasons, using a condom every time you have sex will improve a gay mans odds to 1 in 2450.
My main problem with this is that it assumes that no gay man ever uses a condom, clearly a bad assumption.
Also, doesn't the fact that condoms are 90% effective each time used not translate into 90% year long reduction?
Should I even care if this is a mistake?