Bookmark and Share

Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: egen anycount

From   Maarten Buis <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: egen anycount
Date   Wed, 25 May 2011 09:14:39 +0200

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Thomas Speidel <[email protected]> wrote:
> The reality is much less picture perfect: a MET value is assigned from a
> published compendium of physical activities. This compendium has a single
> decimal point of precision (just like the last page on the Wikipedia
> article). Of course, if I had a choice I would do the calculations myself,
> thus preserving more accuracy, but I have to rely on published sources and
> work within its constraints.
> I suspect you are going to suggest using reshape... :-)

No, if you want to make use of >= or <= or == evaluations, and you
really care about those equal signs, than you must code those
activities as 10*MET values. These will be integers and thus stored
precisely. The distinction here is between precise measurement (which
you do not have, but the same is true for most of us) and precise
storage. It  is the latter that gave you trouble when you tried to
evaluate -variable >= some number-.

Hope this helps,

Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen
*   For searches and help try:

© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index