Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
25 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: CDC and cell phones? WTF? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
After reading a short blurb about how 4 out of 10 households use only cell phones, the data originating from a CDC study, I felt compelled to see if I could find where demographic studies were part of disease prevention and health education.

Nope. Nothing on their web site. Except the questionable involvement they have in "violence prevention". That gem on their web site led to read their mission statement in more detail, looking for how a gov organization founded to prevent and reduce diseases (primarily communicable ones) has taken on the task of being an advocate for gun control and bullying. But no connections were to be found.

Which brings us back to the cell phone question - why are these guys doing demographic surveys about cell phones? How is that related to malaria or random anthrax attacks or really anything in the field of "diseases"?

I like the CDC by the way. I think they need to get out of political subjects like gun control because that's not a disease. And this cell phone thing confuses me. It looks like nothing more than budget hunting by expanding the mission of the agency into other areas in order to foster new requests for budgets and staff.

I haven't had a land line for over 10 years now and there have been no discernible health risks as a result. But I saved enough money to buy several new guns.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmb
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless20140...
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Interesting.

The idea is that if you only have a cell phone you are less likely to have insurance and more likely to drink a lot. I'm not buying it. Using an "under 65" criteria it's easy to see why there are more uninsured with only cell phone and I don't see it as being connected to cell phone usage as much as being an emerging change in how people live.

Overall I think the study was a waste of money and just another attempt to expand the horizon for the agency. Mainly because it seems disease control money is better spent controlling diseases.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
It's done as part of an overall health survey, not an completely independent study.

As to why they care, from the CDC report - basically, they are evaluating whether a landline based health survey is inaccurate for not reaching a large number of users. Thereby leading to bias in any such results.
10 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
DWTripp wrote:
Interesting.

The idea is that if you only have a cell phone you are less likely to have insurance and more likely to drink a lot. I'm not buying it. Using an "under 65" criteria it's easy to see why there are more uninsured with only cell phone and I don't see it as being connected to cell phone usage as much as being an emerging change in how people live.

Overall I think the study was a waste of money and just another attempt to expand the horizon for the agency. Mainly because it seems disease control money is better spent controlling diseases.


No, I don't think that's what the report is saying. They aren't saying there is causation. They are saying that if they use a landline survey, that they will not have an accurate picture of what percentage of the population meets certain health criteria - like drinking.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave G
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
El Chupacabratwurst
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
I could see if they conducted a study if cell phones causing cancer. But not sure why they studied this.


Oh wait, yes I do. Someone probably didn't have anything to do so they needed some reason to keep their job so they did this study.


Two things:

1) They're doing the study anyway, so gathering easy-to-obtain additional data is not only efficient, but gives them potentially useful demographic data for future studies.

2) Gathering data about the methodology of the study and whether or not it's still valid is just good science.

9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
I could see if they conducted a study if cell phones causing cancer. But not sure why they studied this.


Oh wait, yes I do. Someone probably didn't have anything to do so they needed some reason to keep their job so they did this study.


Hmmm. That's my initial reaction as well. Probably due to the CDC smearing itself with shit by advocating gun control... something clearly outside their reason for existing as a government agency.

What Barb's evil twin is saying is that they needed to study who only has cell phones so they can... uh... in the future... ah.... know that unless they have the cell numbers they won't get good survey results? I'm not sure about all this. What are they wanting to survey in the first place that requires them to study how many households only use cell phones? How about how many households where 5 drinks a day are common also have an X-Box One? Or a 50" flat screen TV? or DSL versus cable broadband?

I'm probably just being overly sensitive and the reality is that every government agency needs to conduct extensive demographic studies so they understand how to conduct even more extensive demographic studies.

Or you could just ask Google. They already have all the information and would probably give it to the CDC for a fair price.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
DWTripp wrote:
I'm not sure about all this. What are they wanting to survey in the first place that requires them to study how many households only use cell phones? How about how many households where 5 drinks a day are common also have an X-Box One? Or a 50" flat screen TV? or DSL versus cable broadband?


Maybe because drinking is linked to DISEASE as CDC and Xboxes aren't?

And maybe because no one does a survey by XBox means?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
galad2003 wrote:


I thought about that but I would think the study would mention something like we did this study for our other studies.


For fuck's sake, it does say that.

But let me let you and Tripp get back to your government BAD BLARGH moment.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
galad2003 wrote:
she2 wrote:
galad2003 wrote:


I thought about that but I would think the study would mention something like we did this study for our other studies.


For fuck's sake, it does say that.

But let me let you and Tripp get back to your government BAD BLARGH moment.


I only skimmed the first page. You can call me an idiot if you want but I think you are the idiot for actually taking the time to read it. BWAHAHA




I just had the same WTF reaction when I read the OP, but, unlike Tripp, I didn't think the CDC would just do a random survey about cell phone use, so I looked for why they had bothered. I know that violates the rules of RSP which require everyone to hyperventilate about government waste and abuse without having any facts.
3 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
galad2003 wrote:
You ever get to the point that it's more fun to wind someone up in RSP than anything else?


I started at that point. Back when RSP was created. And look at me now. Still going strong.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
DWTripp wrote:
galad2003 wrote:
You ever get to the point that it's more fun to wind someone up in RSP than anything else?


I started at that point. Back when RSP was created. And look at me now. Still going strong.


Yay, you?

I know I shouldn't bother, but it's like a puzzle trying to figure out the 500 ways all of your posts are just steaming piles of bullshit.
5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
she2 wrote:
[q="galad2003"]
I just had the same WTF reaction when I read the OP, but, unlike Tripp, I didn't think the CDC would just do a random survey about cell phone use, so I looked for why they had bothered. I know that violates the rules of RSP which require everyone to hyperventilate about government waste and abuse without having any facts.


Really? Hyperventilate? C'mon Sue, all I did was what I always do. I read a story that made no sense and decided I needed to know more. But I also wanted to watch a few Clash videos on YouTube and researching why the CDC would do this would take time away from my musical interlude. So, like always, I posted an accusatory and slightly ridiculous thread here knowing full well that all the eager-beaver "there you go again" types in RSP would do the research for me.

And so it was.

"Rock the Casbah, baby!"
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
DWTripp wrote:
she2 wrote:
[q="galad2003"]
I just had the same WTF reaction when I read the OP, but, unlike Tripp, I didn't think the CDC would just do a random survey about cell phone use, so I looked for why they had bothered. I know that violates the rules of RSP which require everyone to hyperventilate about government waste and abuse without having any facts.


Really? Hyperventilate? C'mon Sue, all I did was what I always do. I read a story that made no sense and decided I needed to know more. But I also wanted to watch a few Clash videos on YouTube and researching why the CDC would do this would take time away from my musical interlude. So, like always, I posted an accusatory and slightly ridiculous thread here knowing full well that all the eager-beaver "there you go again" types in RSP would do the research for me.

And so it was.

"Rock the Casbah, baby!"


4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Boise
Idaho
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
"Trolling" is the fallback position for people who realize that they have no intelligent response. Nice graphic though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would respond to this thread, but I'm too busy hyperventilating.*








(* Note use of "snarky" black for thread. )
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
maxo-texas wrote:
I would respond to this thread, but I'm too busy hyperventilating.*








(* Note use of "snarky" black for thread. )


If they had surveyed about use of robots in the work force though...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Citrom
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
badge
MENTE, MANU ET INSTRUMENTUM
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
she2 wrote:
It's done as part of an overall health survey, not an completely independent study.

As to why they care, from the CDC report - basically, they are evaluating whether a landline based health survey is inaccurate for not reaching a large number of users. Thereby leading to bias in any such results.


I scanned the report. Yes, this data is gleaned from health surveys. Through the whole report I saw all the proper data handling comments one would expect. I did not however see why one would ask this question, analyze this data, and create reports about it, not any more than one would ask how many fondu pots a household has.

As noted in the report, in order to avoid "coverage bias" during telephone surveys, of any kind, one now needs to account for the many households who only possess wireless telephones. This is an information engineering issue.

Moreover, as any of this ties into healthcare, there are plenty of agencies that already deal with that. Whether you have a cellphone doesn't seem to have a thing to do with disease control. Said differently, then the CDC might as well start studying fluctuations in the price of oil in order to understand how this affects the availability of medical grade plastics. Scope!

I think Tripp makes a valid point.
.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
isaacc wrote:


I think Tripp makes a valid point.
.


There, Tripp. The Canadians have validated your existence.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
she2 wrote:
isaacc wrote:


I think Tripp makes a valid point.
.


There, Tripp. The Canadians have validated your existence.


I think isaacc should apologize.



Not for anything in particular. Just because he's Canadian.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
maxo-texas wrote:
she2 wrote:
isaacc wrote:


I think Tripp makes a valid point.
.


There, Tripp. The Canadians have validated your existence.


I think isaacc should apologize.



Not for anything in particular. Just because he's Canadian.


Well, Canada does have to answer for Molson's and Bryan Adams, but they did give us William Shatner and the Kids in the Hall, so its probably a wash.

Darilian
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.