Biology majors of Veeky Forums

biology majors of Veeky Forums

did or is your university teaching you statistical analysis as part of your degree ?

if so, what programs are you using ?

>have met a number of american graduates who 'dont know' stats
>not trying to start a pissing contest
>just a confused user

r

R

studying molecular biology, (bio)statistics is an elective, the other choice was biochemistry, I chose biochem, but I will be taking statistics soon probably, blabla

besides that they use maple ta and language-wise R (a bit at least)

so do you mean statistics is not core to bio in US of A famalam?

It depends on the school. Most of the people I know took stats in undergrad. I was required to take stats at Cornell.

i forgot to say im in sweden

thanks for the replies, understood swedebro. i'm guessing this is the case for the USA too.

i use R, SPLUS and MATLAB and was required to learn the latter; however there is no formal course at my school for the former.

did anyone receive formal training in R, or did you just apply the principles you learnt using other programs ?

a generation of post-grads training themselves from youtube videos in the statistical package they actually need seems crazy.

wondering if it can be the same elsewhere

side-thread: apparently p-values could be done away with completely in the near future - what does Veeky Forums think about it ?

are bayesian stats the future of the scientific literature, or do you still see importance in reporting p-values

Nope, not required here.

thanks for the reply USAbro

i would like to know why you think that is

I am wondering how graduates are expected to interpret papers without this basis in stats

It was required in my school. I don't think you can generalize OP. The US has the best universities in the world, but it also has some lame cow colleges for dummies.

thats mildly disturbing but i hear you

>best in the world
depends on your field user

thanks for replies all

did you get any formal training in R or did you teach yourself ?

>depends on your field user
Sorry, I should have said 'best in the world for almost every scientific field.' I guess it's not best in the world for French or Chinese history.

It was taught as part of our intro stats course.

lmfao

getting all american on me like that famalam

i meant bio subsets like marine, zoology

Yes, the US is best in the world for the vast majority of bio disciplines, and the world leader in medicine.

thats awesome

and from what you're telling me, your low end is also extremely low. interesting.

Whatever, I'm glad I live in a country where someone smart like me has the opportunity to attend top research universities. But I guess you're comfortable not having the opportunity because you're just mediocre and you would never make it into our best schools?

>all this hostile projecting

Everyone in my uni bio program took statistics, but most took the shitty intro version that used Excel. There was an R course, but there were only a handful of seats. I wish I could've earned a computational/informatics biology degree but they didn't start offering it until a couple of years after I had graduated.

Unless you are doing actual research, needing to know stats is unnecessary for understanding many (most?) papers.

yeah why are you going turbo trumptastic user?

is this why you guys love stepping on each other so much?

>being in the top university worldwide in my field
>not using it to sniff my own arse
>not equating opportunity with privelige

kek

>unless you are doing actual research
i respectfully disagree here user; the validity of stat tests used is an important method of discerning good papers from shitty ones imo

i think alot of papers getting published today dont really know what kind of data they are even collecting; many just go nuts and collect as much as they can, then try and jam it into some kind of framework to answer a question

cheers for honest reply