Changes

: Bongabill, you're clueless.  The 18-45 population of [[Hollywood]] certainly can be compared with the 18-45 general population as to incidence of disease.  I doubt you've taken half the statistics courses that I have.  You have typical [[liberal style]] in trying to intimidate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:35, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

: Bongabill, you're clueless.  The 18-45 population of [[Hollywood]] certainly can be compared with the 18-45 general population as to incidence of disease.  I doubt you've taken half the statistics courses that I have.  You have typical [[liberal style]] in trying to intimidate.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:35, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

::Mr.Schalfly, actually, I am a professional statistician with both graduate and post-graduate degrees in the subject, and also a 34 year professional career as a statistician working for the official statistics bureau of a major nation.  Now, ''of course'' you can compare the 'Hollywood' 18-45 population to the general 18-45 population, but first you have to define that population.  But first, how are you defining ''your'' population?  Is it that they are living in "Hollywood" - in which case it might be interesting to examine geographical factors upon the incidence of disease?  No - as I see you are including Australians who live in the UK.  So how are you defining members of your data set?

::Mr.Schalfly, actually, I am a professional statistician with both graduate and post-graduate degrees in the subject, and also a 34 year professional career as a statistician working for the official statistics bureau of a major nation.  Now, ''of course'' you can compare the 'Hollywood' 18-45 population to the general 18-45 population, but first you have to define that population.  How are you defining ''your'' population?  Is it that they are living in "Hollywood" - in which case it might be interesting to examine geographical factors upon the incidence of disease?  No - as I see you are including Australians who live in the UK.  So how are you defining members of your data set?

::Secondly, I note that your article does not compare your data set to the general 18-45 population, but instead compares it to the general population of 'all ages', quoting an ''average'' age of diagnosis of 64 - which is clearly outside your terms of reference.    I'm afraid there's absolutely nothing correct here with any of your reasoning, which not only fails Statistics 101, but fails it in the first semester.  This article is specious nonsense.  [[User:Bongabill|Bongabill]] 14:59, 4 May 2008 (EDT)

::Secondly, I note that your article does not compare your data set to the general 18-45 population, but instead compares it to the general population of 'all ages', quoting an ''average'' age of diagnosis of 64 - which is clearly outside your terms of reference.    I'm afraid there's absolutely nothing correct here with any of your reasoning, which not only fails Statistics 101, but fails it in the first semester.  This article is specious nonsense.  [[User:Bongabill|Bongabill]] 14:59, 4 May 2008 (EDT)