RE: the Results are in!

From:Tony Henwood

My comments below

Tony Henwood JP, BAppSc, GradDipSysAnalys, CT(ASC)
Laboratory Manager
The Children's Hospital at  Westmead,
Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, 2145, AUSTRALIA.
Tel: (02) 9845 3306
Fax: (02) 9845 3318

-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff Berger []
Sent: Saturday, 28 June 2003 6:31
To: 'Vinnie Della Speranza';
Cc: 'Donna McClellan'
Subject: RE: the Results are in!

Actually you can't even conclude that. This opinion poll was not
conducted in accordance with modern statistical theory. Polling can't
work without random sampling. Can you tell us what the margin of error
is for your findings? I only thought that as members of a scientific
community we all should understand that the results you claim are
reliable are completely unreliable. 

I suppose you should have asked my mother-in-law. Now that would have been random!!

I only commented on this from a scientific point of view. I have no
interest in blades.  I don't make them. I don't sell them. I don't use

A poll is a poll. You ask for input. You collect the answers, you present them to this list server, no-one asked for them to be published in a journal.

Furthermore, I never said that opinions are meaningless. I only said
that the manner in which you gathered, tallied and presented the
information is meaningless.  Your 4:1 margin claim has no basis in

But it WAS 4:1 wasn't it. or are we all dreaming it??

Cliff Berger

-----Original Message-----
From: Vinnie Della Speranza []
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 12:47 PM
Cc: Donna McClellan
Subject: Re: the Results are in!

you are looking for science where there can be none. I asked the list
for the preferences (which are subjective opinions) of those who have
evaluated different blades. The most that can be concluded from this
poll is that more people buy AccuEdge (by a 4:1 margin) than other
brands. Since this blade costs more, I would presume that those using it
feel that the additional cost is worth it.

Is it really your  intention  to tell those who responded to my query
that their op;inions are meaningless? All I did was count up the replies
and convert to a percent based upon the total number of responses to the

>>> Cliff Berger <> 06/27/03 11:24AM >>>

In fairness to all the companies making blades, and to those who are
them as well,  everyone should be aware that your   <<survey>> has has
statistical merit whatsoever.   This has not been a science behind your
in completely skewed so the results are meaningless.

Best regards,

Cliff Berger

> From: Vinnie Della Speranza <>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:52:32 -0400
> To:
> Cc: Donna McClellan <>
> Subject: the Results are in!
> thank you to all who responded to my query re: best disposable
> blade
> here are the results:
> Accu-Edge   was recommeded by   55% of respondents. This blade was
> recommended more than four times more frequently than the next
> recommended blade.
> Richard Allen  was recommended by   12.5%  of respondents
> Sturkeywas recommended by   12.5%  of respondents
> Shandon was recommended by  10%  of respondents
> Surgipath was recommended by   5%   of respondents
> DuraEdge was recommended by   5%   of respondents
> Vinnie Della Speranza
> Manager for Anatomic Pathology Services
> Medical University of South Carolina
> 165 Ashley Avenue  Suite 309
> Charleston, SC 29425
> Ph: 843-792-6353
> fax: 843-792-8974

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please
delete it and notify the sender.

Views expressed in this message and any attachments are those
of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of The
Children's Hospital at Westmead

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been
virus scanned and although no computer viruses were detected,
the Childrens Hospital at Westmead accepts no liability for any
consequential damage resulting from email containing computer

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>