From your reuters articles “[iT[/i[ihere are now hundreds of stocks of cultured SARS-CoV-2 in laboratories around the world[/i”

Wasn't there a claim amongst "conspiracy theorists" that the cultured stocks did not satisfy all four of Koch's postulates?

1. The organism must be regularly associated with the disease and its characteristic lesions.
2. The organism must be isolated from the diseased host and grown in culture.
3. The disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the organism is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host.
4. The same organism must be reisolated from the experimentally infected host.

[i"It fulfils at [uleast some[/u of Koch’s postulates (the conditions that should be met in order to determine whether an infectious agent causes a particular disease). The totality of available evidence demonstrates that the SARS-CoV-2 virus both exists and is the cause of the disease COVID-19."[/i

https://research.reading.ac.uk/research ... -theories/

From your reuters articles “[iT[/i[ihere are now hundreds of stocks of cultured SARS-CoV-2 in laboratories around the world[/i”

Wasn't there a claim amongst "conspiracy theorists" that the cultured stocks did not satisfy all four of Koch's postulates?

1. The organism must be regularly associated with the disease and its characteristic lesions.
2. The organism must be isolated from the diseased host and grown in culture.
3. The disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the organism is introduced into a healthy, susceptible host.
4. The same organism must be reisolated from the experimentally infected host.

[i"It fulfils at [uleast some[/u of Koch’s postulates (the conditions that should be met in order to determine whether an infectious agent causes a particular disease). The totality of available evidence demonstrates that the SARS-CoV-2 virus both exists and is the cause of the disease COVID-19."[/i

https://research.reading.ac.uk/research ... -theories/

I'd dispute the cultural differences between Sweden and the UK, or other European countries, having any significant impact on their performance.
For instance they have various mono cultures present in Sweden, as a percentage of the population they have more people living in Sweden (19%) that were foreign born than the UK (12%). I'd assume this would make messaging with an aim of compliance more difficult to achieve. To be fair, more research would be needed in this area. Please note the percentages given are worked off memory so I may be slightly out.

Their testing was reported as being very poor during the peak in April and even by the end of May, especially if you were to compare it to the rest of the developed world.

I will keep an eye on their excess deaths over the next couple of months to look for any notable increase/decrease.

I'd dispute the cultural differences between Sweden and the UK, or other European countries, having any significant impact on their performance.
For instance they have various mono cultures present in Sweden, as a percentage of the population they have more people living in Sweden (19%) that were foreign born than the UK (12%). I'd assume this would make messaging with an aim of compliance more difficult to achieve. To be fair, more research would be needed in this area. Please note the percentages given are worked off memory so I may be slightly out.

Their testing was reported as being very poor during the peak in April and even by the end of May, especially if you were to compare it to the rest of the developed world.

I will keep an eye on their excess deaths over the next couple of months to look for any notable increase/decrease.

Can you tell me how a virus can fulfil the original Koch's postulates and why Rivers postulates are used instead?


https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_koch's_po ... to_viruses
https://davidcrowe.ca/SciHealthEnv/pape ... ulates.pdf
https://paramedicsworld.com/virology-no ... studynotes
https://jb.asm.org/content/33/1/1

Can you tell me how a virus can fulfil the original Koch's postulates and why Rivers postulates are used instead?


https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_koch's_po ... to_viruses
https://davidcrowe.ca/SciHealthEnv/pape ... ulates.pdf
https://paramedicsworld.com/virology-no ... studynotes
https://jb.asm.org/content/33/1/1

RW&B asked me this

=#BF0000Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow!

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates

only 96% then

96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838
600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19%


From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley.

Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ?



No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure.


I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot.

Quote>>
1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020

RW&B asked me this

=#BF0000Seriously? you think that people in the US have never heard of Bill Gates? wow!

https://today.yougov.com/topics/politic ... Bill_Gates

only 96% then

96% of 329,516,498 = 316,335,838
600,000 / 316,335,838 = 0.19%


From a poll of 1575 interviews. Yes, just 1575 folks out of the whole of the US of A. Less than watch Batley.

Go on, percentage that out. 1,575...really ?



No doubt they carried out the poll in sillicon valley for good measure.


I hope the rest of your amazing statistics are more credible than this lot.

Quote>>
1575 interviews - YouGov Ratings data collected between July 2020 and October 2020

That really is how polls work.
I suggest you get in touch with YouGov and point out where they're going wrong with their polling techniques. They're new to the field, so I'm sure they'd appreciate your expert advice.
While your at it you could work out the margin of error for the poll and whether that could take it from 96% to less than 50%.
What's the probability that 96% positives are selected from a pool of less than 50% positives.

That really is how polls work.
I suggest you get in touch with YouGov and point out where they're going wrong with their polling techniques. They're new to the field, so I'm sure they'd appreciate your expert advice.
While your at it you could work out the margin of error for the poll and whether that could take it from 96% to less than 50%.
What's the probability that 96% positives are selected from a pool of less than 50% positives.

I am beginning to worry about your grasp of basic arithmetic.

The 600,000 signatures. I forget what the petition was for now.
What proportion of the population could have signed that if they had wished?
What was the petition? how was it carried out?
This is [u[inot [/i[/ua survey or poll. This is the total number of people who signed, it says nothing about the people who chose not to sign. This is the total number who supported the petition.

As for Brexit:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... ndum-model

On 21st June 2016 YouGov had leave with 51%, down from a peak of 53% on 12th June.
However, this was well within the margin of error for the survey, and hence the poll results were inconclusive.

Back to your example. You claim that 'most' Americans had never heard of Bill Gates. A survey conducted by YouGov found that 96% had heard of him.

It's not clear what you intended to mean by 'most', so we'll take it as 51% (a very generous interpretation of 'most')

Population of US = 329,516,498 (latest census figure)
So, according to you at least 168,053,414 people have never heard of Bill Gates (one time richest man in the world, regardless of what job he did)

survey sample size = 1575
Result 96% of 1575 = 1512 people surveyed said they knew Bill Gates

So, the question is, what's the probability of selecting 1575 people at random from a population with 49% who know Bill Gates and finding 1512 people who say they know him.
You'll need to use binomial probability.
Answer: 1.72 x 10^-335 chance or 0.(335 zeroes)172
= pretty damned close to impossible

To put it another way, if you have a huge bag of red and blue balls (and there are more red than blue), what are the chances of pulling out 1575 balls and finding 1512 of them are blue and only 63 red?

I am beginning to worry about your grasp of basic arithmetic.

The 600,000 signatures. I forget what the petition was for now.
What proportion of the population could have signed that if they had wished?
What was the petition? how was it carried out?
This is [u[inot [/i[/ua survey or poll. This is the total number of people who signed, it says nothing about the people who chose not to sign. This is the total number who supported the petition.

As for Brexit:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/ar ... ndum-model

On 21st June 2016 YouGov had leave with 51%, down from a peak of 53% on 12th June.
However, this was well within the margin of error for the survey, and hence the poll results were inconclusive.

Back to your example. You claim that 'most' Americans had never heard of Bill Gates. A survey conducted by YouGov found that 96% had heard of him.

It's not clear what you intended to mean by 'most', so we'll take it as 51% (a very generous interpretation of 'most')

Population of US = 329,516,498 (latest census figure)
So, according to you at least 168,053,414 people have never heard of Bill Gates (one time richest man in the world, regardless of what job he did)

survey sample size = 1575
Result 96% of 1575 = 1512 people surveyed said they knew Bill Gates

So, the question is, what's the probability of selecting 1575 people at random from a population with 49% who know Bill Gates and finding 1512 people who say they know him.
You'll need to use binomial probability.
Answer: 1.72 x 10^-335 chance or 0.(335 zeroes)172
= pretty damned close to impossible

To put it another way, if you have a huge bag of red and blue balls (and there are more red than blue), what are the chances of pulling out 1575 balls and finding 1512 of them are blue and only 63 red?