in , ,

Despite Aberdeen’s attempt to copy Bournemouth beach, infection rate in England still nearly THREE times higher than in Scotland

Any wean can add up wee numbers to make a bigger one for a headline. Any wean doing Media Studies or not doing Media Studies will know that numbers add up to nothing unless you put them in context. They don’t, of course.

Editor [92] to Conor [18]:

216? Is that a lot? Do you think the figure for England might be interesting? You’ve heard lots about Scotland not doing any better so how many infections did they have in the last 7 days?

Cub Reporter, Conor [18]:

The 7 day average was 832 cases last week and they’ve got 10 times the population so they’ve got a lower infection rate? Told you!


Hold it, son. That means an average of 832 EVERY day or 5 824 in the last seven days. You said you had Nat 5 Maths at the interview, I seem to remember.


Yeh, but, still, ten times the population?


Yes, ten times 216 or 2 160 cases of infection if the rate was the same in England?

Get it?

But it was 5 824? Yes?

So the rate in England per capita, pro rata, per head of population, is roughly home many times higher?

5 824 divided by 2 160?

You need a calculator?

Roughly? Oh FFS it’s nearly THREE times higher even after a spike in Aberdeen.

Get me a coffee.

Written by James Alami

Why pregnant women should donate unbiblical cords, by expert

Another lawmaker’s wife kidnapped in Jigawa