= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Open Thread June 2010, Part 2 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (534)
It does seem odd to get such divergent results.
Bad luck could be, not just getting that 5% result which 95% accuracy implies, but some non-obvious difference in the volunteers (different genetics?), in the tea. or in the milk.
It isn't that odd. There are a lot of things that could easily change the results. Exact temperature of tea (if one protocol involved hotter or colder water), temperature of milk, type of milk, type of tea (one of the protocols uses black tea, and another uses green tea). Note also that the studies are using different metrics as well.
Nitpick: the second study included both black and green tea.
However, your general point stands, and I'll add that there are different sorts of both black and green teas.