Does anyone here know Math?

[lenny]

I was wondering if this calculation is correct:

"If we take Degan's number of 1/2000, and use 10% infection in the target group (and that is probably too large, but we'll go with it) , we arrive at 13, 862. 6 sexual encounters to have a 50% probability of infection. That's a different partner every single day for about 38 years, and then it is only even money you are infected."

 

[bcneil]

I was wondering if this calculation is correct:

"If we take Degan's number of 1/2000, and use 10% infection in the target group (and that is probably too large, but we'll go with it) , we arrive at 13, 862. 6 sexual encounters to have a 50% probability of infection. That's a different partner every single day for about 38 years, and then it is only even money you are infected."

I do I do.
Just in vegas right now waiting for my tee time.
Sounds reasonable to me

 

[myselftheother]

And the trolls just keep on rolling...

 

[vancity_cowboy]

yep, i do

+1.0 too many posts by lenny in this thread ound:

 

[myselftheother]

yep, i do

+1.0 too many posts by lenny in this thread ound:

:thumb::thumb:

 

[lenny]

I do I do.
Just in vegas right now waiting for my tee time.
Sounds reasonable to me

I'm wondering how that is calculated. It's been a few decades since 1st year calculus and i've forgotten it all.

I'm not sure how he got 13, 862, rather than 10, 000. According to my calculations the pooner doing it once every day would get infected, on average, once every 54. 79 years (2, 000 X 10 = 20, 000/365 = 54. 79). Is that wrong?

Someone is telling me it is wrong and the correct calculation is "you have 1999/2000 + (1/2000 x 90/100) chances not being infected afterwards. That is a chance of 99. 95% (or p = 0. 9995)."

I have no idea what that is talking about. Except apparently once infection in 9995 times?

Maybe there is a website somewhere to calculate the odds on two variables?

 

[GATSBY]

regardless... its better to be safe than sorry bro..