Changes

::::OK, great - we're on the same path then!  I'm delighted we can see eye-to-eye on something at last.  As to your analogy, it is interesting, but kind of irrelevant to this discussion.  So, if you agree with the math, then let's get to work!

::::OK, great - we're on the same path then!  I'm delighted we can see eye-to-eye on something at last.  As to your analogy, it is interesting, but kind of irrelevant to this discussion.  So, if you agree with the math, then let's get to work!

::::We know that C = approx. 1 in 93, from the NCI figures.  But those numbers refer to all women below 45.  The rate for women between 18-45 would be higher, we could make a reasonable guess at, say, 1 in 70 (since the rate for women below 50 is 1 in 50).  And you suggest a rate that is an order of magnitude higher than normal, correct?  That would be, say, 1 in 7.  Now, we need to establish the value of X, the total population of women 18-45 who are in the entertainment business and have been diagnosed with breast cancer.  How do we obtain that number?  [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 20:08, 7 May 2008 (EDT)

::::We know that C = approx. 1 in 93, from the NCI figures.  But those numbers refer to all women below 45.  The rate for women between 18-45 would be higher, we could make a reasonable guess at, say, 1 in 70 (since the rate for women below 50 is 1 in 50).  And you suggest a rate that is an order of magnitude higher than normal, correct?  That would be, say, 1 in 7.  Now, we need to establish the value of both W and X, the total population of women 18-45 who are in the entertainment business, and those within that population who have been diagnosed with breast cancer.  How do we obtain those numbers?  [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 20:08, 7 May 2008 (EDT)