<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I Don&#8217;t Think That Word Means&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:12:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Verdon</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/comment-page-1/#comment-101098</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Verdon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:52:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/10/i_dont_think_that_word_means/#comment-101098</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;...but that they are simply not the right variables. We don’t select our partners from a random pool where 1 in 250 is HIV-positive. There are a vast number of subgroups from which most of us choose not to seek partners: the retarded, the mentally ill, the physically handicapped, the congenitally deformed. Since the incidence of sex among these subgroups is thus artificially low, the incidence of HIV is also artificially low, driving the incidence across the population drastically downward.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Which basically says that the two variables are not independent.  If we selected partners randomly then the two variables would be independent.  But we don&#039;t as you note above.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>...but that they are simply not the right variables. We don&rsquo;t select our partners from a random pool where 1 in 250 is HIV-positive. There are a vast number of subgroups from which most of us choose not to seek partners: the retarded, the mentally ill, the physically handicapped, the congenitally deformed. Since the incidence of sex among these subgroups is thus artificially low, the incidence of HIV is also artificially low, driving the incidence across the population drastically downward.</p></blockquote>
<p>Which basically says that the two variables are not independent.  If we selected partners randomly then the two variables would be independent.  But we don't as you note above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Caliban Darklock</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/comment-page-1/#comment-101029</link>
		<dc:creator>Caliban Darklock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 23:10:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/10/i_dont_think_that_word_means/#comment-101029</guid>
		<description>The problem here is not that the two variables aren&#039;t independent, but that they are simply not the right variables. We don&#039;t select our partners from a random pool where 1 in 250 is HIV-positive. There are a vast number of  subgroups from which most of us choose not to seek partners: the retarded, the mentally ill, the physically handicapped, the congenitally deformed. Since the incidence of sex among these subgroups is thus artificially low, the incidence of HIV is also artificially low, driving the incidence across the population drastically downward.

Furthermore, we don&#039;t select a new partner for each and every sexual contact: we tend to keep the same one as long as possible before switching. The argument is just plain broken out of the gate, no matter what the numbers happen to be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem here is not that the two variables aren't independent, but that they are simply not the right variables. We don't select our partners from a random pool where 1 in 250 is HIV-positive. There are a vast number of  subgroups from which most of us choose not to seek partners: the retarded, the mentally ill, the physically handicapped, the congenitally deformed. Since the incidence of sex among these subgroups is thus artificially low, the incidence of HIV is also artificially low, driving the incidence across the population drastically downward.</p>
<p>Furthermore, we don't select a new partner for each and every sexual contact: we tend to keep the same one as long as possible before switching. The argument is just plain broken out of the gate, no matter what the numbers happen to be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Verdon</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/comment-page-1/#comment-100995</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Verdon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 18:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/10/i_dont_think_that_word_means/#comment-100995</guid>
		<description>Guilty...at least on this topic.  This is one of those things that just annoys me to the point where I can&#039;t ignore it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guilty...at least on this topic.  This is one of those things that just annoys me to the point where I can't ignore it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: flydiveski</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/comment-page-1/#comment-100991</link>
		<dc:creator>flydiveski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Oct 2006 18:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/10/i_dont_think_that_word_means/#comment-100991</guid>
		<description>Pedant!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pedant!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pajamas Media</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/i_dont_think_that_word_means/comment-page-1/#comment-126803</link>
		<dc:creator>Pajamas Media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/10/i_dont_think_that_word_means/#comment-126803</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;     Chances Are:  For the pendant in all of us—Steve Verdon corrects the name of a probability concept as it relates to the likelihood of contracting HIV/AIDs. (Outside the Beltway)  &lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->     Chances Are:  For the pendant in all of us—Steve Verdon corrects the name of a probability concept as it relates to the likelihood of contracting HIV/AIDs. (Outside the Beltway)  <!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
