Skip to main content
7 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 17, 2020 at 18:41 comment added mmesser314 I see a thin band of data in Canada. I understand that a surprisingly large fraction of the Canadian population lives within 20 miles of the U.S. border. There might not be much health data elsewhere, regardless of how much Iodine-131 is in the environment.
Sep 17, 2020 at 16:06 comment added Ryan_L This is an interesting idea, but I don't know that it totally solves the problem. If there is missing data from Canada, won't the red blob will still look weird as it wraps around Ohio and Michigan?
Sep 17, 2020 at 14:01 comment added mmesser314 The units are rad/capita. Is this reported from health data? Then it is more understandable that only U.S. data is included. Perhaps reporting is incomplete for some states.
Sep 17, 2020 at 13:48 comment added rob This takes me back to one of my very first scientist-like experiences. I was in elementary school and we were taking a quiz about how to read a color topographical map, and I sweated over the question “where is the elevation the highest” while I hunted for some hard-to-find white circles on the Colorado Plateau. When we discussed afterwards, the teacher asked that question and then said, in unison with the class, “Mexico!” — because Mexico was printed in a light grey “no data” color. I protested that the Rio Grande river probably didn’t run at the foot of a 14,000-foot cliff.
Sep 17, 2020 at 13:39 comment added rob For the red region, yes. But each of those southwestern states has blobby boundaries between dark blue, light blue, and (apart from Arizona) green, while Canada and Mexico are a completely uniform color.
Sep 17, 2020 at 8:24 comment added mmesser314 It looks like there are similar boundaries at the northern edges of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.
Sep 17, 2020 at 5:30 history answered rob CC BY-SA 4.0