• dgdft
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    You’re talking about the incidence rate as a way of downplaying the importance of the research, when the research is interesting specifically because they were able to identify such a highly specific mechanism that only happens in such rare circumstances.

    The incidence rate isn’t a focus of the article, so why else is that what you’re lasering at if not to make a statement?

    • givesomefucks
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      You’re talking about the incidence rate

      Yes…

      Except everything else is assumptions you’re making…

      You really wanted to tell people not to make it political, but no one did so you just randomly accused me of it for no logical reason.

      I legitimately don’t know why mods have banned you, but at least there’s something I can do. Because explaining this over and over clearly won’t help you understand anything.