From Furious of Feltham

[lathany]

One of this evening's news headlines is a story about a mother whose conviction for the murder of her children was overturned. As a result of this, the BBC website produced a page commenting on the suitability of one of the witnesses, namely Sir Roy Meadow.

Now, Sir Roy belongs to a class of people who really annoy me. Being responsible for convicting an innocent woman ? No (well, actually yes, but not specifically what I'm complaining about). It is because he is a non-statistician claiming to be an expert on statistics.

This happens... far, far too often. Doctors are particularly guilty of it because the use of their own data in the field of medical statistics makes a vocal minority think they know how to interpret all the results. But the lack of statistical training really, really shows. And it gives those of us who actually work in the field a bad name.

Grrrrr.

Comments

[cuthbertcross.livejournal.com]

OK, I take yr point! Though I would argue that emotive figures were used (whether deliberately or not); standing up and telling a jury of non-medical non-statisticians that the chances of this happenning were teeny tiny teeny does strongly imply the unsaid so she probably bumped them off, didn't she..." . I doubt that the bloke thought she was innocent. if you ever want to have a discussion about Munchausen By Proxy, invite me round for tea and we'll whisper so the beebies don't need therapy...