To: skeeter
There’s a big difference between “exposed” and “infected”.
Still this is mindnumbing.
8 posted on
06/30/2010 8:51:13 AM PDT by
JBR34
To: JBR34
There’s a big difference between “exposed” and “infected”.
And “may have infected 1800” is ridiculous, because there is no statistical chance that all 1800 are infected, but only that each bears some small chance of being infected.
Also, the headline says “with HIV” when the article indicates several alternative diseases that don’t sound so alarming.
More lies to sell ads.
31 posted on
06/30/2010 9:47:55 AM PDT by
Atlas Sneezed
(Anything worth doing, is worth doing badly at first.)
To: JBR34
There’s a big difference between “exposed” and “infected”.
And “may have infected 1800” is ridiculous, because there is no statistical chance that all 1800 are infected, but only that each bears some small chance of being infected.
Also, the headline says “with HIV” when the article indicates several alternative diseases that don’t sound so alarming.
More lies to sell ads.
34 posted on
06/30/2010 9:55:03 AM PDT by
Atlas Sneezed
(Anything worth doing, is worth doing badly at first.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson