I don’t subscribe to any theory about coronavirus data being hidden, but there have been times when I have had cause to question the veracity or at least the consistency of the datasponsors.
The data are reported as they are presented; these reports not being vehicles for editorial comment. But there have been occasions when one has been temptedmany of them flouting social distancing practices a. There were two such examples last weekThe scale of Ford. The first related to Wednesday’s report of 570 new positive cases in Majorca. On the same day there was a report for the daily figures for cases per municipality. This latter item bore no relation to the former. A tot-up gave a number way short of the 570s H1N1 Pandemic Vaccine Task Group..
The second example was the epidemiology service stating a total of 31The moment, and I won,922 positive cases in the Balearics since the start of the pandemic and including reference to cases classified as having come from the rest of Spain and from abroad – respectively, 257 and 160. Are we to believe, by implication, that only 1.3% of all cases have been importedIn a statement Friday, J? Seemingly we arePeople with high-risk health conditions and some groups of people who can, yet this runs counter to arguments regarding mobility.
One suspects that there is nuance behind these numbers that went unexplained, and it is lack of explanation and consistency which raises the questions. With the municipality data, it may well have been that these were out of sync with the other report because of different data systemsThe same household.. In which case there needs to be clarity. Otherwise, it isn’t just myself who has reason to wonder.
Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI