<p>I'd like to throw my own <a href="http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/34565/public-health-epidemiology">Public Health and Epidemiology</a> proposal into the ring. Admittedly, it's less developed than some of the other's on the list, but I think it probably has a pretty compelling overlap CrossValidate's audience.</p>

<p>My take on a few of the proposals, and why <em>I</em> support them:</p>

<ul>
<li>Biology: Half of what I do is probably better described as Biology. I think a question like <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/16437/how-are-epidemic-models-simulated-in-case-of-mobility/16441#16441">this one</a> on CV illustrates a situation I've been tangling with. Mathematical modeling - and by extension epidemic models - don't really have a logical home. MathOverflow is probably too theoretical at times, especially for models that don't have a pleasant analytical solution. I've also got my own issues with relying too much on the math-oriented community, but that's getting a bit far afield. Similarly, it doesn't <em>really</em> belong on CrossValidated. Rarely is are the problems statistical in nature. The people probably most familiar with the use and application of these models? Biologists.</li>
<li>Computational Science: "When in doubt, simulate" is probably one of my major guiding principles. It seems pretty clear how statisticians could benefit greatly from having an active community of people discussing how to throw more hardware at the problem.</li>
</ul>
