Let's be fair thinksaboutit, the word algorithm is merely a set of steps, but the public is deceived to think it is something deep and sinister.thinksaboutit wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 1:03 pmSo you choose to use a model instead of actual statistics on deaths!Splatt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:29 amNot actually the case.thinksaboutit wrote: ↑Sat Mar 20, 2021 7:18 pm Somewhat higher than your 1 or 2 estimate for death through adverse reactions from vaccines.

Why not check qCovid which is the official algorithm the government uses.

And remember the figures off that are based after LD1.0 so the risks are even lower now.

For example, if I take a temperature in centigrade and multiply that by 9, and divide it by 5 and add 32 to the result I get the same temperature in Fahrenheit. I have used an algorithm, since to multiply something, I use a hidden loop to do iterative addition. Not one in 1,000 members of the general public would recognise the conversion as an algorithm, since algorithms are supposed to be too complicated to understand. I'll guess that the qcovid algorithms may use a couple of actuarial lookup tables to find the answer, but we are not talking about satellite orbit prediction or molecule docking algorithms. Like an income tax calculation, the qcovid algorithm is a simple set of lookups and minimal equations. It's a no-brainer. So cut Splatt some slack here, and reserve criticism of algorithms for circumstances where suspicion is warranted.