niman wrote:
Each datapoint has a link with the source data. I believe interpretation is quite straight-forward.
We can start a whole new round of discussion about the straightforwardness of the information...but it was already discussed in earlier posts of this topic. So I will just try to show you on an example, how unstraightforward on my opinion the data is.
That is what FluTracker map show for L'viv, Ukraine.
"Reported Location: L\'viv, Ukraine
Confirmed/Probable Cases: 104056
Fatal Cases: 37
This is an aggregated report based on 12 reports near the same location."
1. Reported location is not L'viv, Ukraine. This data is for Lviv oblast. This is not straight-forward.
2. There is no link to a source data. This is again not straightforward.
3. Your interpretation of the data is as much misleading as it can only be in this case. I mean Confirmed/Probable cases. Compare to the following: Dead/probably dead: 100. Dead or probably?
The number your are giving as Confirmed/Probably cases:104056, probably (because there is no link to source) is taken from Official Ministry report. This number includes those ill on different form of Inluenza, ARI, and other illnesses. You can only suggest, that some of them are caused by H1N1. And this has nothing to do with word "Confirmed". As for the probable cases of H1N1:104056 this was also not taken from the report. This is also is not straightforward.
Compare: Warsaw, Poland: Confirmed/Probable cases: 4; Lviv, Ukraine: 104056. Question is: No one in Warsaw i ill on ARI or Influenza? Probably this is not true. And vise versa.
The whole "Confirmed/Probably" I guess was taken at some point as template, and it would be hard to change that in a map, but this does not make information straight-forward. It just is not.
All I am saying that information given in a map with such obviously self Interpreted description, that is way different from source, is no value and IS misleading.