Category Archives: Statistics

A Good Way to Estimate the Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination

Posted on August 12, 2021 by mikethemadbiologist

Recently, there have been a slew of TV reports, tweets, and the like with statistics like “[some really high percentage] of hospitalized patients are unvaccinated” which are arguing that vaccination is a very good thing. To preempt any antiva assholes–seriously, … Continue reading →

Posted in COVID-19, Statistics | Comments Off on A Good Way to Estimate the Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination

COVID-19, Gyms, and Oslo: The Power of Rarity

Posted on July 1, 2020 by mikethemadbiologist

I’m sort of surprised this NYT article describing an unreviewed manuscript about gym use and COVID-19 spread in Oslo, Norway hasn’t gotten more play. Here’s a synopsis (boldface mine): Like many countries, Norway ordered all gyms to close in March … Continue reading →

Posted in COVID-19, Statistics | 6 Comments

D.C.’s COVID-19 Data Problems

Posted on May 25, 2020 by mikethemadbiologist

I wrote this before yesterday evening’s phone conference with reporters (obviously, I wasn’t on it). DC Health sort of suspended the march to fourteen days and moved it back to eleven days, since they claim, based on this figure, that … Continue reading →

Posted in COVID-19, DC, Statistics | Comments Off on D.C.’s COVID-19 Data Problems

Science Reporting, Serology, and Bayes Theorem

Posted on April 30, 2020 by mikethemadbiologist

Last week, we discussed the implications of Bayes Theorem on estimating the actual prevalence. Specifically (foreshadowing with a bad pun here), the specificity of a test measures the probability that someone who tests seropositive wh is not seropositive is really … Continue reading →

Posted in COVID-19, Statistics | Comments Off on Science Reporting, Serology, and Bayes Theorem

Bayes Theorem, COVID-19, and False Positives

Posted on April 23, 2020 by mikethemadbiologist

During the last week, there has been an upswing in discussions of Bayes Theorem regarding serotype testing for COVID-19. We’ll get to Bayes in a bit, but first, serological testing. Serological testing has the potential to identify who has been … Continue reading →

Posted in COVID-19, Statistics | Comments Off on Bayes Theorem, COVID-19, and False Positives

Biologists Should Not Learn How to Code

Posted on December 6, 2019 by mikethemadbiologist

Update added here OK, that’s a little extreme, but over the Thanksgiving weekend, I came across some advice which essentially amounted to biologists should learn how to code. I’m not sure that’s great advice. Since I’m in the genomics bidness, … Continue reading →

Posted in Bioinformatics, Computers, Statistics | 5 Comments

Understanding the Limitations of Your Data: The Student Debt Edition

Posted on July 5, 2019 by mikethemadbiologist

As I’ve noted many times, when doing analysis, you must understand the limitations of your data, whether it be the microbiome, genomics, education statistics, polling data, or, well, anything else. With presidential candidates Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders both … Continue reading →

Posted in Economics, Education, Statistics | Comments Off on Understanding the Limitations of Your Data: The Student Debt Edition

How to Use Polling Data for Gaslighting Clickbait

Posted on May 30, 2019 by mikethemadbiologist

Consider this part of our ongoing series in how not to use polling data. This head-explodey tweet came across the transom recently: https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1133727392919371778 The tweet claims, “For the third week in a row, The Economist/YouGov polling shows that the share … Continue reading →

Posted in Democrats, Polling, Statistics | Comments Off on How to Use Polling Data for Gaslighting Clickbait

Revisiting Misadventures in Interpreting Democratic Primary Polling Data (LIZLADS ARE THE WORST)

Posted on May 15, 2019 by mikethemadbiologist

Since we’re discussing the Democratic primaries, I’ll began with my typical disclosure that, were I voting today, I would vote Warren. A month ago, Emerson Polling released a poll, which led to wailing and gnashing of teeth in certain quarters: … Continue reading →

Posted in Democrats, Polling, Statistics | Comments Off on Revisiting Misadventures in Interpreting Democratic Primary Polling Data (LIZLADS ARE THE WORST)

When Standard ‘Pundit Talks To Pals’ Behavior Is Gussied Up With Numbers

Posted on April 24, 2019 by mikethemadbiologist

Et tu, 538? One of the long-standing problems in political punditry is when pundits consider the group of people they know, a group which is almost always completely unrepresentative of the phenomenon they’re discussed, as a representative sample. Seth Masket, … Continue reading →

Posted in Democrats, Polling, Statistics | Comments Off on When Standard ‘Pundit Talks To Pals’ Behavior Is Gussied Up With Numbers