statsguy.co.uk Report : Visit Site

Technical data of the statsguy.co.uk

Geo IP provides you such as latitude, longitude and ISP (Internet Service Provider) etc. informations. Our GeoIP service found where is host statsguy.co.uk. Currently, hosted in United Kingdom and its service provider is Webfusion Internet Solutions .

HTTP Header Analysis

HTTP Header information is a part of HTTP protocol that a user's browser sends to called Apache/2.4.33 (Unix) containing the details of what the browser wants and will accept back from the web server.

DNS

HtmlToText

the stats guy search primary menu skip to content about me search for: correlation does not equal causation , dodgy statistics , public health more nonsense about vaping 18th march 2018 adam 3 comments a paper was published in plos one a few days ago by soneji et al that made the bold claim that “e-cigarette use currently represents more population-level harm than benefit”. that claim, for reasons we’ll come to shortly, is not remotely supported by the evidence. but this leaves me with rather mixed feelings. on the one hand, i am disappointed that such a massively flawed paper can make it through peer review. it is a useful reminder that just because a paper is published in a peer reviewed journal does not mean that it is necessarily even approximately believable. but on the other hand, the paper was largely ignored by the british media. i find that rather encouraging. we have seen flawed studies about e-cigarettes cheerfully picked up by the media before (here’s one example , but there are plenty of others), who don’t seem too bothered about whether the research is any good or not, just that it makes a good story. perhaps the media are starting to learn that parroting press releases, when those press releases are a load of nonsense, is not such a great idea after all. sure, the paper made it into two of our most dreadful and unreliable newspapers, but as far as i can tell, the story was not picked up at all by the bbc or any of the broadsheet newspapers. and that’s a good thing. so what was wrong with the paper then? it’s important to understand that the paper did not collect any new data. there was no survey or clinical trial or review of health records or anything like that. it was purely a mathematical modelling study based on previously published data. soneji et al attempted to model the benefits and harms of e-cigarettes at the population level by considering what proportion of smokers are helped to quit by e-cigarettes, thus experiencing a health benefit, and what proportion of never-smokers are encouraged to start smoking by e-cigarettes, thus experiencing harm. of course a mathematical model is only as good as the assumptions that go into it. the big problem with this model is that there is no evidence that e-cigarettes encourage anyone to start smoking. now, there have been studies that show that young people who use e-cigarettes are more likely to start smoking that young people who don’t use e-cigarettes. soneji et al used a meta-analysis of those studies to obtain the necessary estimates of just how much more likely that was. but there is a big problem here. the assumption in soneji et al’s modelling paper is that the observed association between e-cigarette use and subsequent smoking initiation is causal. in other words, they assume that those people who use e-cigarettes and then go on to start smoking have started smoking because they used e-cigarettes. a moment’s thought shows that there are other perfectly plausible explanations rather than a causal relationship. surely it is more likely that there is confounding by personality type here. the sort of person who uses e-cigarettes is probably the type of person who is more likely to start smoking. if e-cigarettes were not available, those people who first used e-cigarettes and then subsequently started smoking would probably have started smoking anyway. but this is to some extent guesswork. while soneji et al can most definitely not prove that the association between e-cigarette use and subsequent smoking is causal, no-one can prove it isn’t causal from those association studies, even if another explanation is more plausible. we can, however, look at other data to help understand what is going on. given that e-cigarettes are now far more available than they were a few years ago, if e-cigarettes were really causing people who wouldn’t otherwise have smoked to start smoking, then you would expect to see population-level rates of smoking start to increase. in fact, according to data from the office for national statistics , the opposite is happening. according to the ons data, “since 2010, smoking has become less common across all age groups in the uk, with the most pronounced decrease observed among those aged 18 to 24 years”. now, of course we can’t say that that decrease in smoking prevalence is because of e-cigarettes, but it does seem to argue strongly against the hypothesis that e-cigarettes are encouraging young people to start smoking on a grand scale. and if you believe soneji et al’s claims, people would be starting smoking on a grand scale. prof peter hajek, quoted by the science media centre, has calculated what soneji et al’s claims would mean if they were true in the uk: “this new ‘finding’ is based on the bizarre assumption that for every one smoker who uses e-cigs to quit, 80 non-smokers will try e-cigs and take up smoking. it flies in the face of available evidence but it is also mathematically impossible. in the uk alone, 1.5 million smokers have quit smoking with the help of e-cigarettes. the ‘modelling’ in this paper assumes that we also have 120 million young people who became smokers.” i think we can all see that having 120 million young people who are smokers among the uk population doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. why could the peer-reviewers of the paper not see that? politics lessons must be learned. it must never happen again. 14th october 2017 adam leave a comment now that multiple accusations of rape and other serious sexual offences have been made against harvey weinstein, everyone agrees that what happened is terrible, that lessons must be learned , and that it must never happen again. a few weeks ago, when grenfell tower burned down in london, with the loss of dozens of lives, everyone agreed that it was terrible, that lessons must be learned , and that it must never happen again. when it turned out that british journalists had been hacking phones on a grand scale, including the phone of a dead schoolgirl, everyone agreed that it was terrible, that lessons must be learned , and that it must never happen again. when it became clear that jimmy savile had been a prolific sexual abuser, everyone agreed that it was terrible, that lessons must be learned , and that it must never happen again. when the banking system collapsed in 2008, causing immense damage to the wider economy, everyone agreed that it was terrible, that lessons must be learned , and that it must never happen again. it seems to me that the lesson from all these things, and more, is clear. when people are in a position of power, sometimes they will abuse that power. and because they are in a position of power, they will probably get away with it. this will happen again. people in a position of power are the ones who make the rules, and it doesn’t seem likely that they will change the rules to make it easier to hold powerful people to account. i suppose it could happen, in a democracy such as the uk, if voters insist that their politicians prioritise holding the powerful to account. sadly, i can’t see that happening. most people prioritise other things when they go to the ballot box. so unless that changes, all these things, and similar, will happen again. dodgy reporting , dodgy statistics , public health do 41% of middle aged adults really walk for less than 10 minutes each month? 24th august 2017 adam 4 comments i was a little surprised when i heard the news on the radio this morning and heard that a new study had been published allegedly showing that millions of middle aged adults are so inactive that they don’t even walk for 10 minutes each month. the story has been widely covered in the media, for example here , here , and here . the specific claim is that 41% of adults aged 40 to 60 in england, or about 6 million people, do not walk for 10 minutes in one go at a brisk pace at least once a month, based on a survey by public health england (phe). i tracked down the source of this claim to

URL analysis for statsguy.co.uk

http://www.statsguy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/physical-inactivity.png
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/2015/05/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/do-you-believe-in-dinosaurs/#comments
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/category/economics/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/more-nonsense-about-vaping/#comment-60945
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/about-me/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk//#search-container
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/2015/11/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/leave-vs-age.png
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/screenshot-from-2016-12-18-113759.png
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/the-independents-anti-vaccine-scaremongering/#comment-60917
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/author/adam/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/asking-for-evidence-from-all-trials/#respond
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/brexit-voting-and-education/
http://www.statsguy.co.uk/category/politics/
data.gov.uk
bbc.co.uk
data.police.uk
independent.co.uk
standard.co.uk
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk
thesun.co.uk
dianthus.co.uk
nomisweb.co.uk
dailymail.co.uk

Whois Information

Whois is a protocol that is access to registering information. You can reach when the website was registered, when it will be expire, what is contact details of the site with the following informations. In a nutshell, it includes these informations;

Domain name:
statsguy.co.uk

Data validation:
Nominet was able to match the registrant's name and address against a 3rd party data source on 28-Sep-2017

Registrar:
Heart Internet Ltd t/a Heart Internet [Tag = HEARTINTERNET]
URL: http://www.heartinternet.co.uk

Relevant dates:
Registered on: 02-Aug-2014
Expiry date: 02-Aug-2019
Last updated: 07-Oct-2017

Registration status:
Registered until expiry date.

Name servers:
ns.heartinternet.uk
ns2.heartinternet.uk 79.170.43.3

WHOIS lookup made at 23:39:23 13-Jun-2018

--
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:

Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2018.

You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at https://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.

  REFERRER http://www.nominet.org.uk

  REGISTRAR Nominet UK

SERVERS

  SERVER co.uk.whois-servers.net

  ARGS statsguy.co.uk

  PORT 43

  TYPE domain

DOMAIN

SPONSOR
Heart Internet Ltd t/a Heart Internet [Tag = HEARTINTERNET]
URL: http://www.heartinternet.co.uk
Relevant dates:

  CREATED 02-Aug-2014

  CHANGED 07-Oct-2017

STATUS
Registered until expiry date.

NSERVER

  NS.HEARTINTERNET.UK 79.170.40.2

  NS2.HEARTINTERNET.UK 79.170.43.3

  NAME statsguy.co.uk

DISCLAIMER
This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central registry
for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:
Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2018.
You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as permitted
by the terms of use available in full at https://www.nominet.uk/whoisterms,
which includes restrictions on: (A) use of the data for advertising, or its
repackaging, recompilation, redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing
or hiding any or all of this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume
limits. The data is provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the
register. Access may be withdrawn or restricted at any time.

  REGISTERED no

Mistakes

The following list shows you to spelling mistakes possible of the internet users for the website searched .