-
Just weighting it against the entire population makes it just as worthless though. The infection will never take off everywhere at the same time, so at least at the start - or if you manage to contain it mostly to one area like China apparently did -, only the population of the actual areas affected count. Otherwise, it's a game of "who has the most population overall" to keep the relative infection numbers down...
-
Surely a graph like this is meaningless if it's not weighted according to population. How can you compare China to UK.
No, that's exactly how you do want to compare things. A pandemic spreads amongst people. It doesn't spread faster in a more populous country, it just hits various limits (at significant proportions of the population) earlier/later.
-
Some thoughts from the FT as to why they don't weight their graphs by population
https://www.ft.com/video/9a72a9d4-8db1-4615-8333-4b73ae3ddff8
You are reading a single comment by @pipwish and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
SwissChap
Greenbank
aggi
@pipwish
Interesting that they are broadcasting COBR powerpoints now on live TV. Surely a graph like this is meaningless if it's not weighted according to population. How can you compare China to UK.
1 Attachment