UK statistics tsar rebukes UKHSA over flawed jabs data
“Those numbers were misleading & wrong & we’ve made it v clear to UKHSA. I’m lost for words at the willingness to publish a table that led people to believe that, with a footnote that was too weak”
ft.com/content/a51f85…
“Those numbers were misleading & wrong & we’ve made it v clear to UKHSA. I’m lost for words at the willingness to publish a table that led people to believe that, with a footnote that was too weak”
ft.com/content/a51f85…
The NIMS v ONS denominator debate continues to hot up with criticism still robust regarding the latest attempt to “correct” by the UKHSA, sticking with NIMS but adding two pages of caveats.
Still the main (wrong) impression is vaccinated more likely to get infected than unvaxxed
Still the main (wrong) impression is vaccinated more likely to get infected than unvaxxed
David Spiegelhalter, chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at Cambridge university, a statistical research institute, said the “minor changes” failed to address the problem.
“These effects will be minor compared to the gross distortions produced by using incorrect population figures,” said Spiegelhalter, adding “some footnote warnings cannot compensate for calculating such hopelessly biased rates”.
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
