I wanted to do a comparison of a province that adopted strict restrictions vs one that didn't. This is a comparison of data from: https://usafacts.org/visualizations/coronavirus-covid-19-spread-map/state/tennessee https://bccdc.shinyapps.io/covid19_global_epi_app/ BC had strict restrictions while Tennessee didn't. Tennessee didn't have any mask/vaccine/vaxx pass mandates, while BC had all these. I would think comparing these two states per 100K in hospitlization should should a dramatic decrease in BC if the restrictions work. Now I understand that the two have different population density. However, I think the comparison is still useful. Tennessee
BC
If you look at the totality of BC vs Tennessee, you can see that the 7 day average per 100K in BC is consistently higher than Tennessee for the same time period. This would be evidence that mandates do not work as advertised. Can someone correct me if I'm looking at this in the wrong way? The point I'm trying to clarify is if the Mandates aren't helpful, then why are they still pushing it? What's the negative impact of the mandates? Have there been any data collected or research done on the negative impact of the mandates? Well being? mental health? economic prosperity? Is the use of the mandates justified? |