| Huh? Is anyone else scratching their head wondering why the CDC is tracking this kind of info? I guess the FCC will start tracking the flu next. |
|
| They track it because household demographic, income, and a flurry of other statistical information changes based on whether a home is cell or landline only...that can seriously impact health-related surveys... |
|
|
|
 AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ | Dewey defeats Truman |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Not to mention the fact that the increase in cell-only households presents other issues in disease control. Suppose you have a serious outbreak that requires immediate notification of all residents in an area. When everyone had landlines, you could call all numbers in a given group of exchanges and be pretty sure you'd reached everyone. With cells, people often move and keep their old number, which may be from an area across the country. How much of an issue is that, and how do you deal with it? That's something the CDC needs to find out. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by ISurfTooMuch:Suppose you have a serious outbreak that requires immediate notification of all residents in an area. When everyone had landlines, you could call all numbers in a given group of exchanges and be pretty sure you'd reached everyone. With cells, people often move and keep their old number, which may be from an area across the country. I am sure the government, if it needed to send out such a message, could make use of emergency texting. The only problem of course is how do you make sure it is really from the government and not someone trying to cause a panic?
Come to think of it how do you prevent that if the government just tried calling everyone instead? I know that if anyone calls me saying they are from the government, I am quite skeptical.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! |
|
| said by pnh102:said by ISurfTooMuch:Suppose you have a serious outbreak that requires immediate notification of all residents in an area. When everyone had landlines, you could call all numbers in a given group of exchanges and be pretty sure you'd reached everyone. With cells, people often move and keep their old number, which may be from an area across the country. I am sure the government, if it needed to send out such a message, could make use of emergency texting. The only problem of course is how do you make sure it is really from the government and not someone trying to cause a panic? Come to think of it how do you prevent that if the government just tried calling everyone instead? I know that if anyone calls me saying they are from the government, I am quite skeptical. Isn't that why they have radio and TV and the "Emergency Broadcast System" ??? You don't call everyone in a city on the phone. You put out a broadcast on TV.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
TACSPEEDPremium
join:2001-04-14
Tacoma, WA | I rarely listen to the radio and watch very little TV. I also have text messaging disabled on the my prepaid cell phone.
However if they posted the information on the Internet, I would probably see it.
So the emergency broadcast system needs to include the Internet now.
--
Fiber Optics is the future of high-speed internet access. Stop by the BBR Fiber Optic Forum. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by TACSPEED:So the emergency broadcast system needs to include the Internet now. »ISPs Injecting Their Content Into Websites
You mean something like this? |
|
| reply to TACSPEED
But you wouldn't see an emergency messege because the pop up would probably be blocked 
I still have my landline....I could see the Census Bureau keeping tabs as well as the DOD
--
"When I was in junior high school, the teachers voted me the student most likely to end up in the electric chair."---Sylvestor Stallone |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to Karl Bode
The core of this story -- that cell-only households have outstripped TP-only households -- is completely unremarkable.
Even before I read the comments, I was scratching my head over the CDC being the source. I see the comments section is with me on this one: Everyone wants to talk about how odd it is that the CDC is the best source for this communications statistic.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL |
|
| reply to battleop
said by battleop:Is anyone else scratching their head wondering why the CDC is tracking this kind of info? I guess the FCC will start tracking the flu next. As most readers here already know, the FCC is part of the government in name only. Given they are really a taxpayer funded arm of the major carriers, why would anybody trust any statistics they produce? In my book the CDC is a far more credible source, even for information that seems to fall in the FCC's sphere. |
|
cahiattPremium
join:2001-03-21
Smyrna, GA | reply to funchords
said by funchords: Everyone wants to talk about how odd it is that the CDC is the best source for this communications statistic. Probably the most reliable stat also. Cableco's, Telco's and wireless providers not throwing money at them or fake pollsters..... |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
1 edit | reply to funchords
It's really not that strange if you understand polling and statistics.
»www.scientificamerican.com/blog/···09-03-11
Wireless-only folks differ from those who still keep a landline, Blumberg explains. Not only do they skew younger, but they behave differently, too. Introduce those differences into health surveys, he says, and the results are biased.
Half of wireless-only users are under 30 years of age, but the greatest predictor of whether they rely solely on a cell phone is if they own or rent: renters are four times as likely to be wireless-only as are people who own their homes, Blumberg says. On top of that, they're more likely to live in metropolitan versus rural areas, and in or near poverty. I'm not sure why people's minds are so blown by the fact that government agency tasked with collecting accurate health information tracks landline/mobile trends to ensure accurate polling data... |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to TACSPEED
I have text messaging disabled on my cell phone, however, carriers can override it. Eg. I will still get a message or 2 from AT&T.
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to Karl Bode
Thanks for that. I posted my own angle here:
»www.publicknowledge.org/node/215···ent-1502 |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
Our city just implemented a reverse 911 system. It is supposed to call everybody in the affected area including the whole town ~100,000. That is as long as you still have landline. |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Isn't that why they have radio and TV and the "Emergency Broadcast System" ??? You don't call everyone in a city on the phone. You put out a broadcast on TV. The EAS (Emergency Alert System) is a joke. They didn't even use it during 9/11. |
|
AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ | they didnt have to. Every station was broadcasting info. They were qafraid a EAB would preempt local coverage. (ps: as i type this im in a path train stuck at the wtc train station) |
|
| reply to funchords
I didn't think about that but yeah, it does highlight how even the government realizes its own data (FCC) isn't worth much... |
|
| reply to ISurfTooMuch
said by ISurfTooMuch:Not to mention the fact that the increase in cell-only households presents other issues in disease control. Suppose you have a serious outbreak that requires immediate notification of all residents in an area. When everyone had landlines, you could call all numbers in a given group of exchanges and be pretty sure you'd reached everyone. With cells, people often move and keep their old number, which may be from an area across the country. How much of an issue is that, and how do you deal with it? That's something the CDC needs to find out. With cellphones, that's even easier. Just broadcast a text message to everyone within range of cell towers in the affected area. That way, even folks who are just visiting will get the message. GSM phones already have the capability to receive localized broadcast messages, I can't imagine CDMA doesn't have a comparable capability.
tmh |
|
