Most of the maps tends to look same if you map absolute values and pick absolute value features that are tied to population 🫣

incredibly fucked up, pisses me off

What’s up with North Dakota? High glyphosate use but no cancer?

Phama making bank

I’ll never forget why I went down this rabbit hole. Two identical wheat fields that I drove by every day for work sat side by side. Early September. I drove by after a weekend three days since the last pass, and one field was brown and desiccated. The other was still as green as it had been Friday...

Why doesn’t it follow the border line to the south? This part of the two statistics does not relate.

Blue map is deeply exaggerating numbers. The concentration by color could be useful but some of those rural counties have a fraction of the 'additional cases added' in total population calling the whole thing to question.

ok but no such thing as "human rights" - communist propaganda through and through.... now what?

It takes more than two maps to show correlation.

The maps actually shows areas of US which are population dense.

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqn8805ezmqzqhxuernt4mjmfdrxgzgjv5uhjk24nvstqyhrwxtd2qcvxssy what doesn't give you cancer at this point? also the data doesn't correlate with California or North Dakota. What kind of cancer?