Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
***
Berry et al. manage to write an entire article about some intervention measure or other under a newly invented political name without defining the term once. Aren’t they aware that a journal like PNAS is read outside their own local village? Similar measures might well be taken elsewhere under other names and Berry et al.’s result might well be relevant, if only the reader knew, what it was about. And while it’s not uncommon for specialists to become blind to their assumptions, what about reviewers and editors? Haven’t there been any?
***
Castro & Singer suffers from the same statistical fallacy as Goldstein, whom they cite, and Rommel et al. (list of 2021-03-30). They very strongly over estimate the number of years lost to Covid in the oldest age groups. Factoring that into their result, vaccinating the younger populations yields the highest benefit.
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum