Letter:Statistics ensure good results
Your support helps us to tell the story
This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.
The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.
Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.
Sir: I agree with Dr Bird that statistics is the servant of science, not its ruler (Letters, 1 June). However good statistical practice provides a formalised way of ensuring that good science is done.
The purpose of randomisation blinding and use of placebos in clinical trials is to avoid the conscious and unconscious biases which can occur when patients or clinical investigators use other means of selecting treatment. In addition randomisation protects the public, in permitting the rigorous estimation of probabilities of obtaining a false positive or false negative result from a particular trial design.
With regard to Dr Bird's alternatives of comparing non-randomised trial results with historical data or "a scientific estimate of the placebo effect", if such estimates are based on data they are inherently statistical - if not based on data are they scientific?
DAVID MORGAN
Wokingham, Berkshire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments