OK, let us try this one more time … Barney style:
The “control group” in a medical study are individuals that are KNOWN, SELECTED. and EVALUATED individually.
EXAMPLE: Johnny fits the age group range for the sample set being studied in an ACTUAL MEDICAL STUDY. Johnny agrees to participate in the study. Johnny visits a medical professional and undergoes an evaluation (questionnaires, vitals, maybe blood work). Johnnys buddy Joey also, did not get the vax, but he was not interested in filling out stuff. JOEY IS NOT PART OF THE CONTROL GROUP IN THIS ACTUAL MEDICAL STUDY.
A CONTROL GROUP in an ACTUAL STUDY, is made up of a bunch of Johnnys. Not “everyone else”.
There … the next method to help you understand will involve crayons and pop-up books.
"We have all this data that conclusively proves that the vaxx is bad, but because we don't have the right paperwork -- just ignore it. tHerE wAs nO cONtroL gRoup!"
I'm a fan of truth. I'm a fan of the scientific method (and yes, when lives are at stake I'm willing to forgo the 'proper paperwork').
A control group should represent what would happen if the intervention or variable in question was not introduced, which often aims to reflect what is 'normal' or typical within a larger population. There are some studies where the control group 'signs up', and there are others where the control group is the 'background population'. See 'observational studies', 'natural experiments', 'public health interventions', some 'cohort studies', and more.
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. None. I tried to be nice, but you opted to go full retard. Likely you are cerebrally impaired, and pretend to be something you are not. I suggest a helmet when you venture out (I assume you fall down a lot).
Sadly, your parents clearly failed you. Your lack of education and inability to comprehend is astounding, which makes your claims laughable. You wouldn't know the scientific method if it kicked you in your vagina.
I will not agree to disagree because you haven't presented anything to actually disagree with, other than your capacity for logical reasoning. On that we agree, you have none.
In epidemiological studies, using the 'general population' as a baseline has always been extremely useful, and this is especially true in studies looking at incidence rates of diseases or conditions where a large, generalized control group provides a normative baseline.
The background population must match the study group in relevant demographics and characteristics as closely as possible, except for the variable being studied. This ensures that any differences observed can be attributed solely to the variable in question rather than confounding factors. (In this case, kid/vaxx.)
Nice cut and paste. You cant garner a % using the "general population", seeing as proportionality requires denomination. You cant say the "gen pop" is the denominator, considering you have no idea what that number is. Its fucking dumb. Shocker, I know. Additionally, no one has a clue what the true % of injectees is. No one. So, nice try but, no. It doesnt work. Go back to study hall.
OK, let us try this one more time … Barney style:
The “control group” in a medical study are individuals that are KNOWN, SELECTED. and EVALUATED individually.
EXAMPLE: Johnny fits the age group range for the sample set being studied in an ACTUAL MEDICAL STUDY. Johnny agrees to participate in the study. Johnny visits a medical professional and undergoes an evaluation (questionnaires, vitals, maybe blood work). Johnnys buddy Joey also, did not get the vax, but he was not interested in filling out stuff. JOEY IS NOT PART OF THE CONTROL GROUP IN THIS ACTUAL MEDICAL STUDY.
A CONTROL GROUP in an ACTUAL STUDY, is made up of a bunch of Johnnys. Not “everyone else”.
There … the next method to help you understand will involve crayons and pop-up books.
You sound like a DC bureaucrat.
"We have all this data that conclusively proves that the vaxx is bad, but because we don't have the right paperwork -- just ignore it. tHerE wAs nO cONtroL gRoup!"
I'm a fan of truth. I'm a fan of the scientific method (and yes, when lives are at stake I'm willing to forgo the 'proper paperwork').
A control group should represent what would happen if the intervention or variable in question was not introduced, which often aims to reflect what is 'normal' or typical within a larger population. There are some studies where the control group 'signs up', and there are others where the control group is the 'background population'. See 'observational studies', 'natural experiments', 'public health interventions', some 'cohort studies', and more.
We can agree to disagree.
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about. None. I tried to be nice, but you opted to go full retard. Likely you are cerebrally impaired, and pretend to be something you are not. I suggest a helmet when you venture out (I assume you fall down a lot).
Sadly, your parents clearly failed you. Your lack of education and inability to comprehend is astounding, which makes your claims laughable. You wouldn't know the scientific method if it kicked you in your vagina.
I will not agree to disagree because you haven't presented anything to actually disagree with, other than your capacity for logical reasoning. On that we agree, you have none.
Ok, in crayon...
In epidemiological studies, using the 'general population' as a baseline has always been extremely useful, and this is especially true in studies looking at incidence rates of diseases or conditions where a large, generalized control group provides a normative baseline.
The background population must match the study group in relevant demographics and characteristics as closely as possible, except for the variable being studied. This ensures that any differences observed can be attributed solely to the variable in question rather than confounding factors. (In this case, kid/vaxx.)
Nice cut and paste. You cant garner a % using the "general population", seeing as proportionality requires denomination. You cant say the "gen pop" is the denominator, considering you have no idea what that number is. Its fucking dumb. Shocker, I know. Additionally, no one has a clue what the true % of injectees is. No one. So, nice try but, no. It doesnt work. Go back to study hall.
I'm glad you got that off your chest. The folks in the control group would be proud.