Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Jdoryson t1_j0jy0gy wrote

Forgive me please for not being impressed with a sample size of 20 (bivalent boosted) being the data set used to draw the major conclusion.

But this is what I expect from the CDC these days... Confirmation bias and cherry picked data.

31

Ghosted19 t1_j0ktche wrote

Well I guess the public beta tests will change your mind. In all seriousness, 20?! That’s not enough to create accurate data. In my line of work we make high tolerance low volume parts….to try to assess our CPK based on PPM is impossible due to the skew one failed dimension would put on the rest of the analysis. I cannot see how extrapolation of data from 20 samples could accurately gage anything.

10

sethbr t1_j0nrbzp wrote

In the actual study, 79 had received the bivalent booster.

1