NightlyPoe said:
And another reminder that the United States has a population 6.5x that of Italy and landmass 32.5x the size of that country. |
Nope, you don't get it. If a virus spreads among the whole country and reaches everywhere the same, then you compare the numbers per capita. But that is not the case. The virus spreads in hotspots and is stoppedbefore it reaches the whole country. In China the hotspot was Wuhan and the Hubei province. Despite the chinese new years and increased travel activity at this time, the rest of China didn't get much cases. In South Korea the hotspot is Daegu. One of the biggest and densest urban area (Seoul) has not a lot of cases. Same is true in the US, the virus has more spread at the west coast and in NY. This alone shows you, that a per capita look is failed (or you need to start one separately for Washington and Florida).
But a virus we intend to contain and many countries indeed contained, there the absolute numbers are more relevant. It shows when the containment works.
Only because a country has a higher population, a virus doesn't spread faster. Say two countries imported 10 cases from China at the beginning the same. Then these 10 persons are infecting the next, despite the size of the overall population. That depends on how much people these 10 meet before the infection is identified. And in a country with a higher total population each person doesn't meet more people on average than in a country with lower total population.
If anything, the density of the population is more of a factor. As Italy has six times the population density, it would be to expected that the virus grows faster in Italy. As the statistics shows it is the other way around, which indicates that other factors make it worse in the US compared to Italy.