CERF numbers show a very low frequency of PRA in the tested breeds but OptiGen numbers show an apparently higher incidence of probable affecteds. How do you compare the numbers?
Think for a minute about the difference between a radio poll and a professional Gallup Poll. The radio poll invites listeners to “call in and tell us your opinion.” Both CERF and OptiGen results are sort of like that radio poll–you “call in” if you feel like it, and only the people in “calling distance,” as it were, are likely to answer. Gathering statistics for a Gallup Poll is a science in itself. It’s not easy to estimate the true frequency of any specific thing, be it disease, gene, opinion, or behavior. Statisticians go to great (and expensive) lengths to preclude any bias in counting or reporting. Sampling must be random, must not exclude any groups or classes of information, must not have a tendency to count some groups (or classes of information) more than others, must be large enough to be significant, must not rely on volunteered information, and so on. Neither CERF nor OptiGen is set up to generate such an unbiased population survey that could define the frequency of PRA in
Related Questions
- CERF numbers show a very low frequency of PRA in the tested breeds but OptiGen numbers show an apparently higher incidence of probable affecteds. How do you compare the numbers?
- Can we make a booking if we have low numbers of people camping or staying each day for the camp?
- Do wind turbines produce low frequency noise (LFN)?
