YouSaid · the spoken record

David Spiegelhalter

lines on the record: 38
first: 2026-07-02
most recent: 2026-07-02
sittings or episodes: 1
sources: podcast

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“You know you're going to be surprised that whatever he does isn't what you thought because of misdirection. Trump is the same. You've got to expect surprises. So in these situations, we have to, we can't optimize. We can't put numbers on the events unless they're very finely defined events, as of course you get in the betting exchanges like polymarket. But you need resilience and deep uncertainty, meaning that you have to act and in a way that's going to be not too bad across a wide range of circumstances, including ones you've never even thought of. So that's why, and so you can't optimize, you're always going to have redundancy, you need insurance, you need all these things because you don't know what's going to happen. And so I think, you know, by trying to protect yourself against the downside, that's how you live with uncertainty. And once you've done that, I think one should take risks. Don't be reckless. Take risks. Be bold.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Of AI and climate, and actually geopolitics is just so massive what's going on. It's not quite, I don't feel quite the level of risk as we are in the 1930s, which was, you know, if you wanted an age of uncertainty in the 1930s or risk and danger, the 1930s was there. And of course, it ended up in complete catastrophe, essentially. So I don't think we're quite at that stage yet, but we are living in an age of uncertainty, I think. But it's very difficult to put numbers on these uncertainties. And in these situations, what people call deep uncertainty, where you can't even list the possibilities of what might happen, you've got this imagination. I mean, I often say I use it in my talks. I show a picture of a magician and then a picture of Donald Trump. And I say, what do these two got in common? And so it says misdirection, which I thought was really clever. That's not what I was thinking of. For each, you've got to expect surprises. You know, you go and see Major.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“As I say, from the right from the beginning, this is deeply personal, deeply personal, because it's a relationship of us with the outside world. And so, you know, from my personal point of view, I'm 72. I've actually got locally advanced prostate cancer. So there's a lot of uncertainty about my personal future. But there would be anyway. I'm not going to go on forever. So, you know, I know that if I live another 10 years, I think that'll be pretty damn good. In fact, I'd be very lucky. I don't think I'm going to live 20 years. So, you know, I've got this sort of, there's quite a finite horizon sitting there, which, you know, when I think about it, I get sad because I won't be seeing family and things like that. But actually, I don't mind too much about dying. But there's a lot of uncertainty, and I prefer that it's uncertain, in fact. I love this uncertainty, not knowing. It's great. In terms of bigger picture stuff, God, the uncertainty associated with the impact of AI, which is, and the impact.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Well, you just hope these models are reasonably calibrated in terms of at the moment they are vaguely predicting what's happened so you know how extreme this event actually is because you're talking about tail areas of a distribution”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Example I use is from the UK. I remember the hot summer. The hot autumn is lovely, hot September. So you can use things that actually, as you said, are directly part of people's experience. They're recent, they're local, and they're past rather than saying some claim about how things are going to be bad in 50 years' time, which frankly is quite difficult for people to grasp, especially if they're going to be dead like I will be. And so I think it's... Really an important part. You've got to be careful there's been some big mistakes where people have said that climate change is making this hurricane 50% stronger and things like that and got a lot of coverage and they've had to retract it later. So you've got to be quite cautious about this modeling. You've got to be really”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Assumes there was not man-made impact on the climate and talk about how likely such a high temperature was and then run another model taking into account man-made impact on the climate, see how likely the model was. And the ratio likely it was to observe something as extremes that. And the ratio of that essentially is how much more likely this was to have occurred given with climate with man-made input into the climate rather than without that. you can convert that into a probability that it was caused by climate change. Met office don't do that. Some people do around the world because that's quite a strong thing to say. But that relative risk, how much more likely is the basis for legal decisions, and could very well become the basis for future claims against fossil fuel companies. So this idea of attribution, which is already part of the civil legal context.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Do, I didn't know the example I used in the book, I think, is a very hot summer in September 23 or something like 24 or something, 23 it must have been. And really hot summer, peak temperature or something like that. And so what they do is run a model which”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Oh, it's fascinating. I'm so glad you asked me about that because I got a chapter on attribution. And I think I've never seen anybody who's written and brought the stuff together about that because it started off in legal cases still being used in court when someone's been exposed to a chemical at work and then they get a cancer later and you want to work out on the balance of probabilities was their cancer caused by the exposure and people do interpret that as being more than 50% chance. And you can't tell that specific individual but by looking at the epidemiology how many, what is the relative risk associated with this exposure, you can assess whether on the balance of probabilities it was caused. And you do that by looking at how much was the risk increased by the exposure. And those ideas of attribution have been carried straight over into the climate community. The Met Office has got an attribution center, quite a rapid attribution center that will, you know,”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“It's probably not bad, but you're exactly right. And that's the most important thing, I think, in numeracy education is not be able to do, you want to be able to get the sums right, but it's getting an idea of magnitude is absolutely vital. And it's true, once you've got more than two zeros, frankly, it gets pretty tricky.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“And it shows our bad communication because we never ever thought that anyone would think that was the data. And so it's only by listening that you find out you've got to make this clear, you've got to explain things. Because obviously that shows real sophisticated listening. A lot of the stuff is that people, because people don't know how to take numbers apart, they take them at absolute face value without thinking about them, without thinking this number is just ridiculous. They can't assess whether this is a reasonable number, especially when it's got a few zeros on the end. Very difficult. I find it difficult to assess is this a big number?”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“It's based on 10,000 cases for careful statistics. These are a hundred imaginary people in the future. These are purely fictional experts. So it makes you really, oh, we didn't expect.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, I think exactly. So that's my thing. First rule of communication is listen. You have to understand your audiences. You have to know how they might misinterpret something. Can I tell you a story that I don't think it's, I'm not sure if it's in the book or not. You know, we've done a lot of risk communication about health things. And the standard way to do it is to show 100 little people, 100 little dots, and you color in the ones who are going to have a heart attack and you leave blank the ones who aren't. You say, well, this represents your risk. And we had people coming back saying, oh, I don't believe that much. I don't believe that. It's only based on the experiences of 100 people.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Pretty well almost lead with what this data, how you can interpret this data, and also right next to it, how you should not interpret this data. What you cannot conclude from this data. Some is even a table of ticks and crosses, which I think is a really lovely way. And that's part of the new version, the code of practice of statistics. And I've got a conflict of interest there because I'm on the committee that oversees the body that drew this up. So I'm completely obsessed about the code of practice for statistics, which might not sound that riveting, to be honest. But it's got some great bits in it about there's a duty now for statistics producers and communicators to preempt misunderstandings. I mean, this is a really good to try to head the misinformation off as early as possible. Don't be on the back foot responding when people get completely the wrong end of the stick. There'll always be some.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Fear of embarrassment. And that sort of argument has been used by people countering misinformation using this idea of pre-bunking, which I really like. And the pre-bunking misinformation is that actually the, in a sense, experts, whatever, should tell people the misinformation. They should be the first ones to give the news. Do you know, some people might think that this means X or might interpret these numbers to mean X. And this is why it doesn't mean this. And this idea of getting in there first because then people, for a start, might think, oh, cool, I know something other people don't, which sounds quite good. And also that people don't want to be embarrassed and they'd rather know things. I got this knowledge that actually this doesn't mean this. And it's shown to be effective. And it's really taking off in government official statistics bulletins increasingly.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, exactly, exactly. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's too good to be true. So I think it's a balance of stuff, but I'm not so pessimistic. I actually think education is getting better in this regard, I think. Kids, you know, everyone's still bombarded by nonsense all the time. But I think actually maybe because people, especially with AI coming along, where people just have to everybody is going to have to become more discriminating because there's going to be so much crap kind of being put out there in terms of videos and everything like that. People are going to be, otherwise they'll be embarrassed. I think just fear of embarrassment might make people a little bit more cautious about clicking and forward.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“It depends where you look. I see a lot of really good writing and nuanced material on social media and in mainstream media. I think actually the mainstream media reporting of this kind of stuff has got a lot better. You don't see as many cats cause cancer sort of stories as there used to be. There are still in some newspapers, but you don't see that many anymore. Journalists have got a lot better, the press officers have got a lot better. They don't just write promote really shabby studies. They're still there. It's still there. But I think it's actually improved quite a lot. COVID definitely, I think improved, showed, demonstrated the appetite of people for well-reasoned information and statistics. There was huge appetite. And it showed that people can actually understand things quite a lot. There's always the impulse to do quick and dirty things. Oh, there's a big number. This sounds impressive or is a big claim. It's almost certain.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Greasy bacon sandwich in their gulb every day. And from that, you ate one extra case of bow cancer. So maybe that's important. For the individuals, it might not be that important. From a population point of view, it can be. There's thousands of cases of bowel cancer every year. So it can be a relative risk might be actually not very important for an individual and might consider, well, that's reasonable. My pleasure, the trade-off of my pleasure counteracts it. But from a public health point of view, it is important. So again, it depends. You can't just say whether something's important or not. You have to look at the perspective of it.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Six percentage points. And so compared then, if you've got 100 people who don't eat placon sandwiches, six will get bowel cancer. And if you've got 100 people who do eat bacon sandwiches, that six is raised by 20%, which takes it roughly to seven. So seven people would get bowel cancer. And those calculations to see how you apply relative risk to an absolute risk in order to get the sort of absolute size of the impact of eating bacon sandwiches, like essentially means a one in a hundred chance probability that you'll get bowel cancer. It's a tricky. I don't know any journalist who can do that, in fact. And it's not that tricky. We've written software to do it. People have got problems. They teach it in schools really quite well. This is emphasized a lot. It's so important because it puts things in perspective. Because there's 100 people stuffing some...”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, I mean, so it is confusing because they both tend to use the percentage, but the percentage is using it in different ways. And the example I use in all everything I've been talking about for years is I don't know bacon sandwiches and a bacon sandwich a day is supposed to, and I think I actually think this is quite plausible on a causal basis that increase your risk of getting bowel cancer by about 20%. But then that's a relative risk. Whatever your risk is before, it's increased by a fifth. So it's moved up a little bit, whatever your risk before. But to interpret whether that's important or not, we have to know the absolute risk, which is what is anyway my percentage chance of getting bowel cancer if I don't eat bacon sandwiches. And that's best expressed, I like the language of percentage points and about six percentage points. So six out of 100 people who don't eat bacon salaries will get bowel cancer anyway for other reasons. So that's six.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Does that mean no? It just says that if my mug is 55 to 75% empty, I am likely to need a refill. So that's the reason. I think it's British. They ought to sell this as merch outside MI5. I think it's a brilliant bit of stuff that sounds.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“And those words are used so that when we get the threat level, God, I can't remember what it's at at the moment, but it does say it's likely over the next six months. And that means 55 to 75% chance of a terrorist attack over the next six months. So it's quite high. That calibration of language to numbers, I think, is incredibly important to avoid the sort of misunderstandings we know.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“It's better than someone thinking likely means almost certain or something. Even a rough calibration of words is incredibly useful. And actually, I've got it right here. I don't know if this is the, I gave a talk at MI5, and all I got was this lousy mug. And this is from JTAC, the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center in MI5, the ones who decide the terrorism threat levels in the country. And it tells me that if they think a terrorist attack is likely over the next six months, that must mean between 55% and 75% probability.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“The table, I think, has got eight different definitions of light, and they're not that different, 55 to 70% of climate change, it's between 66% and 90%. And sort of they're not so different. They're sort of all above 50%, but not too high.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Diversity of viewpoints that any actual decision maker, I mean, obviously you want all of them to be credible. These are reputable people who know what they're doing, not just anybody's opinion, but that the diversity of viewpoints is really important.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Which is very high risk. And so he got multiple independent intelligence teams to assess the probability that bin Laden was actually in the compound. And they came up with a variety of opinions. So some were quite pessimistic, only 30 to 40 percent probably chance he's there. And they may have been a red team. Red teams are deliberately set up to question, groupthink, to think of alternative things, to be rather pessimistic, possibly, and things. Others were really gung-ho, 80 to 90 percent, Chancy said. So that gave mentors a really difficult decision. And then Obama said, with all, I think it's about 50-50. But he could see the variation in opinion among his advisors, which seems to me every really decision maker should know about that variation. So I really think it's important almost that modelers don't talk to each other too much, that there is...”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“I also think the vital thing is the independence of the teams. I mean, this is more expensive because you really want people who are almost actively competing, who don't necessarily think the same way, have got different perspectives. And again, the example I give in the book of this, which I found so impressive is in 2011 when a Sama bin Laden, it was thought that Osama bin Laden was in this compound in Abotabad. And Obama had, the prisoner had to decide whether to send in the seals in this massive, in this raid, which would have been...”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Mole, it's a really good way to do science. All these independent teams using different approaches. So they got together once a week and constructed a sort of interval that sort of vaguely covered most of the opinions that had been given, but a composite interval. And apparently the meetings I met people afterwards who told me about them were very good. People didn't barge in and say, oh, yeah, you've got to use my model, mine's best. They were very had a lot of humility. They said, well, you know, this week I don't think we've really captured what's going on in a bit cautious about what we've said. But the crucial thing that all just absolutely demonstrated that all these intervals were far too narrow because they were assuming their models were correct. But they did exactly the right thing. Fantastic science. Brilliant science. And then published all the results, the individual results. It's very similar to what people are doing in climate modeling as well with independent models. So you're then producing a composite out of the model outputs.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“And it's a delusion. The main thing is that I don't want to say all the science and stuff, it's all wrong, it's all useless. No, it's incredibly valuable, but it's not precisely correct. And we need to have some humility about our analyses at all times. An example I give in the book, which I still think is a fantastic example, is during COVID with the R number, we're all obsessed with it, how many people someone with COVID on average would go on to infect. And in the UK, we had eight teams with twelve different models trying to estimate R. And once we all got together. And they showed their estimates and their error bars. And when most of the error intervals didn't even overlap. They're trying to estimate the same quantity from larger from the same data, but the error don't even overlap. They cannot both be right. And so, and it's because they have very different ways of using the data. There are very different assumptions in their model, very different types of.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“That every conclusion based on a model is technically wrong. It's not correct. It's just that some are useful. But in particular in confidence intervals where error bars are always too narrow because they assume that it's leaving out major sources of uncertainty, the systematic biases, the errors in the model and things like that. So they're always too narrow. They're not wrong. Doing wrong doesn't make them too wide or makes them too narrow.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“And I'm someone who's worked as my whole lifetime as a statistician. Frankly, you're always calculating Martin Zava and putting error bars and confidence intervals around things. And I don't believe any of them. Basically because they assume the model is true. And all statistical analysis is based on assumptions of independence and normality and linearity and all this sort of stuff and no missing, maybe no missing confounders. And there's assumptions throughout every statistical analysis, every time you use a package that isn't just for descriptive statistics, anything that's sort of doing any sort of inference. And all those assumptions are wrong. Now, there's no such thing as normality. There's no such thing as linearity in real life. But whether they're importantly wrong is the issue. So it's back to this basic, well, it's almost kind of cliche of George Box, a wonderful statistician. He said that all models are wrong, but some are useful.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“I know. I wouldn't want to put a probability on it. That's why I kind of think, well, this is the kind of thing that somebody, if happens once in their lifetime and they'll remember it forever. That's how I kind of categorize.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Ron no, I've got to get this in the right order, gave him a shirt. That's it. And then years later, he was at a hostel and he was talking to someone over the other side of the counter. And he said, and they got talking about friendly people in hostels. Oh, well, I met this man called Ron Beederman. And then he gave me this shirt. And the guy on the other side of the bench stood up and said, yeah, Ron Biederman gave me these trousers. And they were a matching set of shirt and trees of the same cloth. And I thought, oh, this is nonsense. I don't believe this. And then we got an email from Ron Biederman. With a photograph of him saying, yeah, I remember giving these things that he's obviously incredibly generous man, a lot of traveling and he gives his stuff away to people.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“My book Romby About Ron Biederman's Trousers, which is still my favorite. Anyway, because somebody wrote in and said, well, it was a real coincidence. I was robbed when at one point I was staying in a hostel and this man, Ron Biederman, gave me a pair of trousers too, which is sort of special.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Well, some of them are staggering, but for example, but it depends on the perspective, you know, when someone wins a lottery, 145 million or something like that, it is a massive coincidence. It's pure luck. It's a massive coincidence. It's not surprising to hear about it if they sell so many tickets. And so it really depends on your perspective. And so we had a whole coincidence website. There are thousands. We had submitted to us. And I used to grade them roughly into a once a year sort of coincidence, which they happened once every 10 years. Once in a lifetime coincidence for somebody. And because people remember these things because they're telling about them, about them years after they happen. And then once in a hundred lifetime coincidences, and when people tell those, you think, wow, that is amazing. But really, in the end, there's a lot of people, there's a lot of opportunities for things to happen. And so I tell you the one that's...”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Find somebody, might even know someone in common, but we might have liked the same programs, might do this. We have enormous amount of commonalities, and they're going to show up all the time.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, exactly. Our intuition about matches and coincidences is very poor indeed and the standard one is birthdays. We know mathematically and practically it happens all the time that if you've got more than 23 people in the room, there's more than a 50% chance that two of them wish never a birthday. So those sorts of, that's why the party I can't remember how many people we had, you had to put your birthday on it. And the chance of having an exact match is certainly more than a half once it's 23. And then you could be one day away, two days away. So the point is, and so the chance for having something in common. And in fact, we know that from our experience, when you meet somebody and you go through this business of, you know, exchanging stories about this thing, you're going to find, very often find some connection. We know about the degree idea of degrees of separation. We'll find, especially if we share, you know, maybe an ethnicity, maybe a background, maybe a class or something like that.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“Yeah, yeah, I think so, because if you just say, I don't know, well, hang on, you know, we don't know about hardly anything. So there are grades of don't know, essentially. We're basically living a whole world of ignorance. But, you know, some things we know more about than others. And I guess my work, pretty well, the whole work of statistics and everything I do is to do with trying to work out what those grades of uncertainty might be and how to communicate them in an adequate way that's helpful to people. That's pretty well what the whole book's about.”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT
“La Cerie de Houlu Original Furiers Arives, Avoc Amy Rossum, Furieus Suilagent du FBI, Alice Black, a la Portie, Mysterious, Ecalculatris, Vera Justice Mesa Musur colour ventrome la frontier entroposes,”
2026-07-02 · Intelligence Squared · How Should We Prepare for the Unknown? With Statistician David Spiegelhalter · IDENTIFIED FROM THE TRANSCRIPT