Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SARS - what next? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (828)	1/15/2004 6:34:40 PM
From: Henry Niman	Respond to of 1070

Mqurice, Its not the correlation that is the issue. If you take 90 patients and look at HLA frequencies, one is going to be the best fot susceptibility and one is going to be the best for resistance. Same with flipping coins. If you flip in 90 series of ten, one series will have the most heads and another the most tails.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (828)	1/15/2004 6:44:51 PM
From: Henry Niman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1070

Actually, genetic studies in a disease like SARS have even more potential problems because it is passed by contact and can therefore go from one family member to another. The study had only 90 SARS patients and there were only 11 who had the susceptible HLA haplotype. If any of the 11 were related, that would skew the data since 3 were expected to be the HLA frequency in the general population, so you are really only talking about 8 cases over background. If there are 2-3 relatives, then the numbers start to get pretty small.