Has my maths / logic completely failed me

Pacing Mule

Sorry for the obscure thread title but I had no idea what to title this one

So the missus and myself have had a fairly heated debate / row at this stage over something that is frankly ridiculous but that said leads to my question.

She mentioned to me about a program she was watching where there were four kids with the same very rare disease. Apparently according to the program / her the chances of four kids in one family having the same very rare disease were a billion to one but that the disease was not hereditary.

So here's where the row kicks in (summarised as briefly as possible) ....
Firstly I said well you would think that the parents would have stopped having kids after the first couple.
She says they had no reason to - the disease isn't hereditary.
I said well there is a strong possibillity that something is amiss with the genes etc.
She sticks to her guns and says no -definitely not a hereditary thing.
I put forward the match winning point that it was more likely that medicine hasn't evolved enough to spot something than a billion to one chance of four kids having the same rare disease.
Repeat until door slammed etc

Anyway my point is how can the parents in the first place not have stopped having kids after child 2 or 3, and more importantly how can anyone think that a billion to one chance is more likely than medicine not having spotted something in the first place.

So is this a classic men v women different view points ? Has logic escaped me ? Are they all mad ?

/ends therapy rant

Random

You need a beer and the rugby / football highlights. You'll feel better then.

antodeco

Nevermind the argument, go for makeup sex! (I dont mean sex with/in makeup)

alwaysadub

Don't you know women are ALWAYS right??:pac:

starbelgrade

I thought ginger hair was hereditary.

jester77

no lovin for you tonight

Archeron

The butler did it.

Kasabian

Its all that child benefit

Rented Mule

Tell her to 'learn how to parallel park' !!!

For Forks Sake

THEY TERK ER JERBS !!!



Sorry, what ?

landsleaving

Just give her a stern look and inform her:

'That's a Paddlin'

smurgen

what you need is a new woman,yours is thinking too much and is clearly broken.exchange her at your local pub for one which performs the usually bj and cooking fuctions expected

Kiith

You need to save these arguments for things that actualy matter. Let her 'win you over' with her arguments on stuff like this, then you'll have a better chance of convincing her to do anal later.

Pacing Mule

smurgen wrote: »

what you need is a new woman,yours is thinking too much and is clearly broken.exchange her at your local pub for one which performs the usually bj and cooking fuctions expected

Actually she's not thinking at all

MarkR

Screw science. You're probably right. Sure, scientists may have studied this for decades, writing papers, doing tests, getting fancy diplomas etc. But i'm sure you're 50/50 guess will pan out.

landsleaving

Will you be showing her this thread OP?

Pacing Mule

MarkR wrote: »

Screw science. You're probably right. Sure, scientists may have studied this for decades, writing papers, doing tests, getting fancy diplomas etc. But i'm sure you're 50/50 guess will pan out.

You sound like my wife

It's about the numbers.
They have done all of the above for cancer and still not cured it.
At one stage the earth was flat.

etc etc etc

My point is that things evolve - and technology / medicine evolves at a massive rate. It's to me more than a 1 in a billion chance that medicine hasn't evolved enough to spot something. :pac:

Pacing Mule

landsleaving wrote: »

Will you be showing her this thread OP?

Probably

Coriolanus

I need to know the name of the disease, so I can wiki it and pretend to know enough about it to blow your arguement out of the water.

Pacing Mule

Nevore wrote: »

I need to know the name of the disease, so I can wiki it and pretend to know enough about it to blow your arguement out of the water.

Eosinophilic enteropathy


The 1 in a billion chance may or may not be accurate But my point was that in general if four kids from one family all have the same rare disease that medicine says is not hereditary you'd have to wonder has medicine missed something.

m@cc@

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

Bolag_the_2nd

do you want to live on beans until u admit your wrong, the bedroom is gunna be frosty, ur clothes are gunna reak and the stoney silence is gunna be manic, does it really matter whose right, kiss and make up, it will soon be steak and bj day

Kiith

Kiith wrote: »

You need to save these arguments for things that actualy matter. Let her 'win you over' with her arguments on stuff like this, then you'll have a better chance of convincing her to do anal later.

Yep! sometimes it just isn't worth the hastle, especially if you end up on the sofa!

But, sometimes they want you to prove you're right and stand up to them! :rolleyes:

The challange is to work out which tactic is appropiate on the day, it changes depending on the time of the month!

stovelid

I like your style. Initiating a spousal bust-up before a big weekend of sport.

Be sure to re-initiate the argument before the actual games so you can flounce out of the house "somewhere quiet" to "cool off".

lugha

Pageant Messiah wrote: »

Eosinophilic enteropathy


The 1 in a billion chance may or may not be accurate But my point was that in general if four kids from one family all have the same rare disease that medicine says is not hereditary you'd have to wonder has medicine missed something.

You have to consider the number of opportunities. A 1 in a billion chance of anything in a family is rare but with 6 - 7 billion people in the world it's not that surprising if those odds were beaten.
For example there's about a 1 in 2 billion chance that 4 people in the same family would all randomly be born on say Xmas day, but if you scoured the world there's a fair chance you'd find such a family.

So go and apologize to your missus :P

littlefriend

m@cc@ - I was just about to post that 'women know your limits'. Love it!

Millicent

Deleted User wrote: »

Yep! sometimes it just isn't worth the hastle, especially if you end up on the sofa!

But, sometimes they want you to prove you're right and stand up to them! :rolleyes:

The challange is to work out which tactic is appropiate on the day, it changes depending on the time of the month!

Ah no, pet- I have to stop you here. Whoever told you this is a lying sadist b@stard! :P

Millicent

Millicent wrote: »

Ah no, pet- I have to stop you here. Whoever told you this is a lying sadist b@stard! :P

You haven't met my wife! :eek:

pirelli

Pageant Messiah wrote: »

Sorry for the obscure thread title but I had no idea what to title this one

So the missus and myself have had a fairly heated debate / row at this stage over something that is frankly ridiculous but that said leads to my question.

She mentioned to me about a program she was watching where there were four kids with the same very rare disease. Apparently according to the program / her the chances of four kids in one family having the same very rare disease were a billion to one but that the disease was not hereditary.

So here's where the row kicks in (summarised as briefly as possible) ....
Firstly I said well you would think that the parents would have stopped having kids after the first couple.
She says they had no reason to - the disease isn't hereditary.
I said well there is a strong possibillity that something is amiss with the genes etc.
She sticks to her guns and says no -definitely not a hereditary thing.
I put forward the match winning point that it was more likely that medicine hasn't evolved enough to spot something than a billion to one chance of four kids having the same rare disease.
Repeat until door slammed etc

Anyway my point is how can the parents in the first place not have stopped having kids after child 2 or 3, and more importantly how can anyone think that a billion to one chance is more likely than medicine not having spotted something in the first place.

So is this a classic men v women different view points ? Has logic escaped me ? Are they all mad ?

/ends therapy rant

Pageant Messiah wrote: »

You sound like my wife

It's about the numbers.
They have done all of the above for cancer and still not cured it.
At one stage the earth was flat.

etc etc etc

My point is that things evolve - and technology / medicine evolves at a massive rate. It's to me more than a 1 in a billion chance that medicine hasn't evolved enough to spot something. :pac:

Your point is that odds are in favour of this statistic being incorrect. Any statistic like this is obviously highly suspect and many statistics like this have been defeated time and time again.

However that is only one small aspect of the argument. Dna still plays a huge role in society and you would upset people if you were to just argue that it's most likely a junk science.

Many innocent men have been freed from prison thanks to DNA evidence. It has been a very fair and unbiased tool in the right hands. So yes your argument is more than possible and i would welcome someone who questions things like that.Take lead bullet analysis as forensic evidence; this was used by US prosecutors for years to lock up innocent men until the FBI conducted a research and found it was a complete farce


Basically you haven't explained if this disease even effects their life enough for the parents to be extremly cautious about it. I see your point; that after the third child they should have known it was going to happen, but are you sure they discovered it before the second child or third child.

How can we be sure that there is a cure and how much of big deal this is. Can they sue the medical profession and tehreby justify there actions as not their neglience but as medical neglience

If they believed blind the doctors and that it was not hereditory then odds were in their favour.

'Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me' - prosecution by munchausen syndrom excluded

Victor

Of course, you could have four children in the same family die of lead poisoning. These things happen and sometimes happen in clusters. The proximate cause would not be hereditary.

john__long

Matt Damon.

(in that Team America way)

whatdoicare

Did anyone actually look up this disease?

It's like a more extreme version of irritable bowel or food allergy, extremely hard to diagnose and mostly doctors diagnose it by hazarding a guess- all the kids were probably born before the eldest was diagnosed.

It may or may not be hereditary, they don't actually know yet.

Mrmoe

There is a possibility that something like this is linked to their environment either now or when they were born. Even their food source can have an impact. Gut microbiota can have a fairly large effect on a persons health.

John_Cultane

The simple answer is yes logic and maths are beyond your comprehension. People often misuse English with possible and probable. What is a real problem here is you don't get the concept of odds even though you think you do

Pacing Mule

John_Cultane wrote: »

The simple answer is yes logic and maths are beyond your comprehension. People often misuse English with possible and probable. What is a real problem here is you don't get the concept of odds even though you think you do

People often misuse English alright.

John_Cultane

John_Cultane wrote: »

The simple answer is yes logic and maths are beyond your comprehension. People often misuse English with possible and probable. What is a real problem here is you don't get the concept of odds even though you think you do

I hope you're not an English teacher! :eek:

WindSock

Why keep having kids?

Probably hoping the next ones won't be broken.

shellykbookey

People can be unbelievably selfish when it comes to having kids. There's plenty of cases where a child is born with a serious condition and the parents are told that there's a rediculous chance that any other kids will have the same things and the parents go ahead and have more children who end up having the same condition. But then the child can share its feelings on the suituation with their siblings 'cos they're all in it together. FFS!

The worst example I've heard of was a couple who had a baby born with harlequin syndrome who were told not to have more children because it would happen again. They waited a few years and even though they admitted the daughter was miserable, in pain and in and out of hospital the whole time they went ahead and had a second child who also had the condition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlequin_type_ichthyosis

kraggy

Does she want kids? Is that what's she's saying to you? Even if they are ginger?

Jesus Wept

lugha wrote: »

You have to consider the number of opportunities. A 1 in a billion chance of anything in a family is rare but with 6 - 7 billion people in the world it's not that surprising if those odds were beaten.
For example there's about a 1 in 2 billion chance that 4 people in the same family would all randomly be born on say Xmas day, but if you scoured the world there's a fair chance you'd find such a family.

So go and apologize to your missus :P

Not a great example, it's not an entirely random event.
Try do to all your bareback ridin around march/april imo.

NoQuarter

Well im with the OP on this one to be honest! Id say theres a hell of a better chance than 1 in a billion of medicine being wrong!!!

lugha

The-Rigger wrote: »

Not a great example, it's not an entirely random event.
Try do to all your bareback ridin around march/april imo.

Oh, you romantic devil :pac:. True, if all our lovin’ was so regulated, all our young uns would be popping out round about the same time, like cows.
Happily, romance seems to flourish a little more in the rest of the world than in midnight train box cars, and births are distributed, not quite evenly, throughout the year, but near enough.

bonzodog2

Bolag_the_2nd wrote: »

do you want to live on beans until u admit your wrong, the bedroom is gunna be frosty, ur clothes are gunna reak and the stoney silence is gunna be manic, does it really matter whose right, kiss and make up, it will soon be steak and bj day

Soon as in March 14th next year? Quite a wait then ....