I just checked, the deaths per million, the difference in the UK and France is of 0.03% (yes, 0.03%, basically 300 more people/million died in the UK than France).
ps: not even British, but hate selective cherry picking.
I just checked, the deaths per million, the difference in the UK and France is of 0.03% (yes, 0.03%, basically 300 more people/million died in the UK than France).
ps: not even British, but hate selective cherry picking.
For fiction's sake: if France only had 50 deaths/million and according to your "only 300 more people/million more" the UK would have 350 deaths/million, that's "only 0.03% more" but geez, 7x more deadly in the UK than in France!
According to [1], the UK has so far 2351.99 deaths/M and France has 1868.02. The rate of death is 26% higher in the UK.
And that's 0.186% vs 0.235% rate of death. 0.049% (or even 0.03% from your data) is still a big jump.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deat...
So, based on your data: Country | total deaths | population (mm) | % death France: | 125,269 | 67.06 | 0.186% UK: | 157,194 | 66.83 | 0.235%
I don't care so much about the % higher when we are dealing with these kinds of numbers. Is the same as 'eating red meat increases your changes of colon cancer by 10%!!!!` and then you see it increased it from 0.01% to 0.011% (or something like that).
For me, you can find a million explanations for that small difference in the numbers, and I doubt it can be attributed to UK's government handling of the situation.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-deat...
I guess I should start saying my net worth is about 0.1% lower than Jeff Bezos', on the 10E+16 scale or whatever the correct number maybe, I should ask you, you're better at maths.