Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 10-09-2021, 06:44 PM   #16
46zilzal
velocitician
 
46zilzal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz View Post
Knew I could count on you.
Quoted form Vermont sources......Not like you to fall for sample error and extracting conclusions from so small an overall sample size.

Recall the fable of the 9 blind men and the elephant?
__________________
"If this world is all about winners, what's for the losers?" Jr. Bonner: "Well somebody's got to hold the horses Ace."

Last edited by 46zilzal; 10-09-2021 at 06:49 PM.
46zilzal is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 07:14 PM   #17
46zilzal
velocitician
 
46zilzal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,923
Dave, I have the utmost respect for your unique and innovative ability to test and project from historical outcomes in your software: They have changed the fortunes of this bettor many times over. So, it is surprising that you could project on such a small sample size.

Did I miss something here? If so please explain it to me

9 blindmen and the elephant is another way of explaining the narrative fallacy.
This parable has been used to illustrate a range of truths and fallacies; BROADLY it implies that one's subjective experience can be true, but that such experience is inherently limited by it failure to account for other truths or a totality of truth. This parable provides insight into the relativism opaqueness or inexpressible nature to truth, the behavior of experts in fields of contradicting theories, the need for deeper understanding, and respect for different perspective on the same object of observation.

Jacob Bernoulli was the first to observe that a MULTITUDE of observations are necessary to draw any long term conclusions on just about anything.
__________________
"If this world is all about winners, what's for the losers?" Jr. Bonner: "Well somebody's got to hold the horses Ace."
46zilzal is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 08:05 PM   #18
thaskalos
Loitering with intent
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 26,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by 46zilzal View Post
Dave, I have the utmost respect for your unique and innovative ability to test and project from historical outcomes in your software: They have changed the fortunes of this bettor many times over. So, it is surprising that you could project on such a small sample size.

Did I miss something here? If so please explain it to me

9 blindmen and the elephant is another way of explaining the narrative fallacy.
This parable has been used to illustrate a range of truths and fallacies; BROADLY it implies that one's subjective experience can be true, but that such experience is inherently limited by it failure to account for other truths or a totality of truth. This parable provides insight into the relativism opaqueness or inexpressible nature to truth, the behavior of experts in fields of contradicting theories, the need for deeper understanding, and respect for different perspective on the same object of observation.

Jacob Bernoulli was the first to observe that a MULTITUDE of observations are necessary to draw any long term conclusions on just about anything.
When I first read this parable in a buddhist book, there were 3 blind men describing the elephant. Then I read a James Baldwin short story, and the blind men had increased to 6. Now the group has grown to 9!

Could it be that life is getting more and more complicated with the passage of time?
__________________
"A fool and his money...were lucky to get together in the first place."
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 08:25 PM   #19
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 43,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
When I first read this parable in a buddhist book, there were 3 blind men describing the elephant. Then I read a James Baldwin short story, and the blind men had increased to 6. Now the group has grown to 9!

Could it be that life is getting more and more complicated with the passage of time?
Just more versions of the world's "truth". After all, truth is complicated.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 08:29 PM   #20
thaskalos
Loitering with intent
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 26,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Just more versions of the world's "truth". After all, truth is complicated.
How complicated can the "truth" be, if Jesus was preaching it to a group of illiterate fishermen?
__________________
"A fool and his money...were lucky to get together in the first place."
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 10:04 PM   #21
Dave Schwartz
 
Dave Schwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 15,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by 46zilzal View Post
Dave, I have the utmost respect for your unique and innovative ability to test and project from historical outcomes in your software: They have changed the fortunes of this bettor many times over. So, it is surprising that you could project on such a small sample size.

Did I miss something here? If so please explain it to me

9 blindmen and the elephant is another way of explaining the narrative fallacy.
This parable has been used to illustrate a range of truths and fallacies; BROADLY it implies that one's subjective experience can be true, but that such experience is inherently limited by it failure to account for other truths or a totality of truth. This parable provides insight into the relativism opaqueness or inexpressible nature to truth, the behavior of experts in fields of contradicting theories, the need for deeper understanding, and respect for different perspective on the same object of observation.

Jacob Bernoulli was the first to observe that a MULTITUDE of observations are necessary to draw any long term conclusions on just about anything.
RIGOROUS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS is only demanded for things that do not fit your narrative.
Dave Schwartz is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 10:12 PM   #22
thaskalos
Loitering with intent
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 26,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz View Post
RIGOROUS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS is only demanded for things that do not fit your narrative.
PROFOUND!
__________________
"A fool and his money...were lucky to get together in the first place."
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 10:32 PM   #23
xtb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Western NY
Posts: 2,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz View Post
RIGOROUS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS is only demanded for things that do not fit your narrative.
So true!
xtb is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 03:32 AM   #24
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 72,988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz View Post
RIGOROUS STATISTICAL ANALYSIS is only demanded for things that do not fit your narrative.
Pretty much sums up the last, oh I don't know...19 months or so?
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 11:03 AM   #25
Gamblin4ever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodtoo View Post


That's great
Gamblin4ever is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-12-2021, 11:19 AM   #26
Redboard
$2 Showbettor
 
Redboard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: The Villages
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff P View Post
India designed their own their own Peer Reviewed Ivermectin Study looking at Health Care Workers. It was published on Aug 05, 2021 and reached a conclusion that is being completely ignored by policy makers here in the US:
https://www.cureus.com/articles/6480...thcare-workers

Two States in India, Uttar Pradesh and Kerala, acted on the conclusions of that study.

Uttar Pradesh population 241 million (est 2021) decided to continue using Ivermectin for prophylaxis and early treatment just like they had been doing since about May 11, 2021.

Imo, one of the more interesting things some of the States in India decided to do as part of their Test-Trace-Treat Program is hand out Home Medical Kits to people who tested positive as well as people identified through contact tracing as being at risk of infection.

[....................

But not all of the States in India decided to allow use of Ivermectin.

Kerala population 35.8 million (est 2021) disallowed use of Ivermectin for prophylaxis and early treatment on Aug 06, 2021 (the day after the peer reviewed study on Ivermectin was published.)

Comparing the Covid caseload data for Uttar Prashesh vs. Kerala:

According the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site - this is the current data for Uttar Padesh:
https://coronalevel.com/India/Uttar_Pradesh/

According the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site - this is the current data for Kerala:
https://coronalevel.com/India/Kerala/

Obviously health officials in Uttar Pradesh India have been going about this all wrong.
-jp
.
The John Hopkins graphs are only for the last few weeks or so. It would be more fair to compare the entire timelines for Uttar Prashesh vs. Kerala. Since India is the place where the delta variant originated, it would seem logical that the Indian states would have "gotten over" the delta peak quicker than anywhere else.

This graph shows https://science.thewire.in/covid19 that Uttar Prashesh has had 22,756 deaths vs. Kerala's 16,781. If your population estimates are correct, 10,600 deaths(Uttar Prashesh) vs. 16,783 deaths(Kerala), per million, still, a lot more for the non-ivermectin Kerala, but not as much as the Johns Hopkin's graphs would lead one to believe.

As far as where this Ivermectin saga will end, it's obvious that it(and HCQ) would have been helpful to a lot of people. I can understand why they disparaged HCQ (after all, defeating Donald Trump was far more important that saving thousands of lives), but their narrative for Ivermectin will be that:

1) More people would have died because they would not have gotten the vaccine thinking that they could always have taken Ivermectin if infected.

2)They knew that Ivermectin was effective, but it would have gutted the world's supply of Ivermectin, which for poor countries, was their only means of fighting the virus for many months.

#1 is hard to defend. It precludes that people are stupid and takes away their freedom of choice. #2 might be more defendable, although I have no idea what the state of world's supply chain for that drug is.
Redboard is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-12-2021, 11:49 AM   #27
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 17,769
In case some of you missed this in the "coronavirus" thread, I posted this yesterday. This is a lifelong friend and family. They caught Covid from each other.

Again, I'm not anti vaccine. I'm vaccinated, but I'm close to certain the vaccine is not nearly as effective as they are suggesting, wildly inferior to the initial promises, and most likely more dangerous than they are letting on at this point.


Quote:
For those of you wondering how common breakthrough cases are, two of my friends, their daughter, & their aide all just caught Covid.

All were vaccinated.

One already had his booster.

Two of the four wound up in the hospital.

One is still in the hospital (over a week) and is on oxygen now.

I just texted with the one in the hospital. He's one of the toughest guys I've ever known. He told me it's the worst thing he's ever experienced. He's 63 and already had his booster, yet he got the worst case.

Not only is vaccination not a get out of jail free card, it's simply not very good after "x" months have passed.
__________________
“Truth is Treason in an Empire of Lies”
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-12-2021, 08:37 PM   #28
Jeff P
Registered User
 
Jeff P's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: JCapper Platinum: Kind of like Deep Blue... but for horses.
Posts: 4,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redboard View Post
The John Hopkins graphs are only for the last few weeks or so.
The graphs displayed on the webpages I linked to were current as of the day (or the day before) each of my posts.

If you visit the page for Uttar Pradesh on the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site at the link below and hover your mouse over the right-most (or most recent) dot on the graph:

The most recent date on the graph is yesterday Monday October 11 2021.

According the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site - this is the current data for Uttar Padesh:
https://coronalevel.com/India/Uttar_Pradesh/

Quote:
Development of number of Coronavirus cases: Uttar Pradesh, India
In Uttar Pradesh there have been 1,709,965 confirmed cases of COVID-19. Currently about 200 people are sick, that is one in every 990,000 inhabitants.

The current incidence is 0.0 new cases per week per 100,000 inhabitants*.


Same for Kerala. If you visit the page on the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site at the link below and hover your mouse over the right-most (or most recent) dot on the graph:

The most recent date on the graph is yesterday Monday October 11 2021.

According the Johns Hopkins University CSSE Site - this is the current data for Kerala:
https://coronalevel.com/India/Kerala/

Quote:
Development of number of Coronavirus cases: Kerala, India
In Kerala there have been 4,801,796 confirmed cases of COVID-19. Currently about 190,000 people are sick, that is one in every 180 inhabitants.

The current incidence is 217.7 new cases per week per 100,000 inhabitants*.
If you visit the page at the above link and hover your mouse over the right-most (or most recent) dot on the graph:

The most recent date on the graph is yesterday Monday October 11 2021.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Redboard View Post
Uttar Prashesh has had 22,756 deaths vs. Kerala's 16,781. If your population estimates are correct, 10,600 deaths(Uttar Prashesh) vs. 16,783 deaths(Kerala)...
Uttar Pradesh has higher population density than Kerala.

Link to a Wikipedia page listing the largest cities by population in Uttar Pradesh:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._by_population

Link to a Wikipedia listing the largest cities by population for Kerala:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...in_Kerala#List

According to a study published on the NIH.gov site, population density matters.

Relationship between population density and COVID-19 incidence and mortality estimates: A county-level analysis:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8253654/

Quote:
Until January 27, 2021, SARS-CoV-2 has infected 134,556 patients and resulted in 2755 deaths in Sergipe. Currently, the state has the highest incidence (5854 cases per 100,000 inhabitants) and mortality (120 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants) rates of COVID-19 in the Northeast region. Incidence and mortality rates by county ranged from 965 to 10,130 cases of COVID-19 per 100,000 inhabitants and 21 to 169 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. Thirty-two (42.7%) counties had less than 50 inhabitants/km2, 22 (29.8%) between 50–99 inhabitants/km2, and 21 (28.0%) a population density = 100 inhabitants/km2. We found a positive correlation between population density and incidence (rs = 0.326, CI 95% 0.106–0.514, p = 0.005; effect size = weak) (Fig. 1 A) and mortality (rs = 0.518, CI 95% 0.329–0.666, p < 0.001; effect size = moderate) (Fig. 1B) rates for COVID-19.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redboard View Post
As far as where this Ivermectin saga will end, it's obvious that it(and HCQ) would have been helpful to a lot of people. I can understand why they disparaged HCQ (after all, defeating Donald Trump was far more important that saving thousands of lives), but their narrative for Ivermectin will be that:

1) More people would have died because they would not have gotten the vaccine thinking that they could always have taken Ivermectin if infected.

2)They knew that Ivermectin was effective, but it would have gutted the world's supply of Ivermectin, which for poor countries, was their only means of fighting the virus for many months.

#1 is hard to defend. It precludes that people are stupid and takes away their freedom of choice. #2 might be more defendable, although I have no idea what the state of world's supply chain for that drug is.
I don't know where the Ivermectin saga ends either.

I do know that Vaccines had not yet been rolled out and were not widely available during India's Delta Variant surge back in May 2021.

Imo, Ivermectin and other repurposed drugs were pretty much all health officials in India had to work with.

The authors of the peer reviewed Ivermectin study using data for health care workers in India reached the following conclusion:

Quote:
Conclusion

Two doses of oral ivermectin (300 µg/kg/dose given 72 hours apart) as chemoprophylaxis among HCWs reduced the risk of COVID-19 infection by 83% in the following month. Safe, effective, and low-cost chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic alongside vaccine.
Keep in mind that Vaccine Immunity fades over time.

Nature | 17 September 2021
COVID vaccine immunity is waning — how much does that matter?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02532-4

Quote:
Six months ago, Miles Davenport and his colleagues made a bold prediction. On the basis of published results from vaccine trials and other data sources, they estimated that people immunized against COVID-19 would lose approximately half of their defensive antibodies every 108 days or so. As a result, vaccines that initially offered, say, 90% protection against mild cases of disease might only be 70% effective after 6 or 7 months 1.

“It felt a little bit out on a limb at the time,” says Davenport, a computational immunologist at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. But on the whole, his group’s predictions have come true.
I would argue the 83% reduction in risk cited in the Peer Reviewed Ivermectin Study actually stacks up pretty well compared to vaccine immunity when you consider:
  1. Vaccine immunity fades over time.

  2. Ivermectin has proven to be one of the safer drugs in use over the past several decades.

  3. The sheer number of cases reporting adverse side effects for the current vaccines in the VAERS database. (Many orders of magnitude higher than all other vaccines combined over the past 10-15 yrs.)

  4. The lack of long term safety data about the current vaccines.


Someone of median age with minimal risk factors who became fully vaccinated 15 days ago would have a 90% or higher risk reduction against infection from the current vaccines.

But that same person six months after their most recent Covid vaccination likely only has a 70% risk reduction against infection from the current vaccines. (Thus the push for booster shots.)

Whereas, even six months or a year out - a person of the same median age and nearly identical risk factor profile using Ivermectin for prophylaxis likely continues to have an 83% risk reduction against infection. Plus zero risk for adverse side effects the vaccinated person is subjected to with each new dose or booster shot.

I would further argue that last part is not trivial.

Sorry for the long winded rant.

Somewhere out there in cyberspace RR (who hasn't posted in a while) has probably suffered another new thumb cramp.


Cheers,


-jp

.
__________________
Team JCapper: 2011 PAIHL Regular Season ROI Leader after 15 weeks
www.JCapper.com

Last edited by Jeff P; 10-12-2021 at 08:40 PM.
Jeff P is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-12-2021, 09:45 PM   #29
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 105,415
You Fauxci and Biden to shame. REAL information, not demobabble.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-12-2021, 10:51 PM   #30
trijet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 2
https://www.indiatoday.in/coronaviru...306-2021-09-26

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the National Task Force on Covid-19 have dropped the use of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) drugs from their revised guidelines for the treatment of the infection.

The decision was taken after experts found that these drugs have little to no effect on Covid-related mortality or clinical recovery of the patient.
trijet is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
Wagering Pool with best chance to find an overlay.
Win - 36.36%
20 Votes
Place - 3.64%
2 Votes
Show - 9.09%
5 Votes
Exacta - 30.91%
17 Votes
Trifecta - 7.27%
4 Votes
Superfexta - 1.82%
1 Vote
Pick(x) - 10.91%
6 Votes
Hi 5 Pentafecta - 0%
0 Votes
Total Votes: 55
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2021 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.