Epidemiology

I noticed today that our number have now reached 64, which is a satisfying number, mathematically, geometrically, and in relation to genetics. There are also a lot more arcane uses of 64, but in human history it is a number that is useful and relevant. And very simple to use.

It set me on a thought trail that led back to a recent post on another forum that many of us are familiar.

The poster was talking about epidemiology, and suggested accelerating existing efforts, and I quote, "using the web, excel and our own unique experiences we can become epidemiologists. We probably won't be the best, but we can become good enough to make a difference."

When I first read this I thought immediately of the ongoing poll on this site, on anxiety or stress, which today has 60 respondents, and 100% affirmative answers to the poll question. This seems very statistically significant to me!

Though a recent incidence map of occurrence in PD in the USA has been produced recently, no-one really knows what it means, just that there are higher incidences in particular places. That is one kind of way of looking at epidemiology, very different from our poll above.

Still I do think that there could be a lot of useful data from a group of people with the full gamut of PD.....

Is it possible to harness our experiences in this way to shed light on PD?

oldestnewest

You may also like...