s are disastrous. ...Relative risks are deeply misleading. They're a manipulative form of communication. To ever say, "Oh, this doubles your risk, or… - David Spiegelhalter
" "s are disastrous. ...Relative risks are deeply misleading. They're a manipulative form of communication. To ever say, "Oh, this doubles your risk, or increases your risk 50%," absolute No-no! They are hopeless. In some situations they can be very valuable... but in general, medical things what... should be always given... s... with and without something... Like my s... I was getting... 15%, 10 year risk: 15 out 100 people like me might expect to have a heart attack or stroke. So I... roughly halved it... only in terms of relative risk... from 15% to 7-8%. ...Being told it halved it does sound good, but if wasn't a very big number in the first place, halving it is of no interest... especially if the thing's going to give me some side-effects... if it did, it would be completely pointless... [Y]ou cannot know... whether you should do something... [Y]ou cannot trade off the benefits... [and] the harms from a medical treatment without knowing the absolute risk. You cannot do it in any rational way whatsoever. ...A lot of the communication now is using absolute risk, which is a huge improvement.
English
Collect this quote
About David Spiegelhalter
Sir David John Spiegelhalter (born 16 August 1953) is a British statistician and a Fellow of . From 2007 to 2018 he was in the Statistical Laboratory at the University of Cambridge. He is an ISI highly cited researcher and current Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication in the . In 2020 he joined the UK Statistics Authority board as a non-executive director for a period of three years, which was extended through to 2026.
Also Known As
Birth Name:
David John Spiegelhalter
Alternative Names:
David J Spiegelhalter
•
David J. Spiegelhalter
•
Sir David John Spiegelhalter
Related quotes. More quotes will automatically load as you scroll down, or you can use the load more buttons.
Additional quotes by David Spiegelhalter
We find it very difficult to deal with... low numbers, one in a million, one in a billion... Once I have to start counting the zeros, all intuition and feeling goes. So it's hopeless, and of course we're bad at it. Why should we be good at doing that sort of thing? ...[I]t's more and more reported that people will use this expected frequency format, where instead of talking about... .03 per person year... What does that mean, for heaven's sakes. It's absolutely ridiculous scientific language for something. No, what you say is, out of 100 people... we would expect 3 for this to happen each year. ...You talk about a specific group of people, which you can... draw a... picture of... and that helps enormously. You... want to bring things to... whole numbers, small numbers, preferably between 1 and 100, or between 1 and 50... magnitudes that people have got a feeling for, and... no decimal places, no multiple zeros. You've got to get rid of all of that. You've got to get things to units people can understand, preferably on a scale of 1 to 10.
Try QuoteGPT
Chat naturally about what you need. Each answer links back to real quotes with citations.
When it comes to trying to prevent you endangering other people, I don't see anything wrong with persuasion. ...[Y]ou shouldn't be... [endangering people] and you should be trying to be persuaded, if not forced... I get quite Stalinist on these things because... it's so irresponsible for some people to endanger the health of others. If they wanted to make their own decision that only affects them, it's very different, and I wouldn't want to persuade anyone...
Loading...