• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    29
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I don’t think it was designed to imply that. None of the language appears to steer the viewer to a specific conclusion, letting the viewer interpret it for themselves.

    That being said, I would agree that the data itself represents both access to mental health care and culture (specifically, if that culture has a stigma against it).

    I think some of the larger countries are not really useful in the dataset though. I’m curious how say, California and say, Alabama, would look in the dataset.

    • @calcopiritus
      link
      English
      225 months ago

      Considering that 100+ is red, most is orange, low is yellow, it looks like “look these are the bad countries with depressed people”.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        Holy crap I’m blind xD. I take it back, it does seem to portray the notion. Goes to show how subtle it is.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      Yeah I think it the best would be comparisons in smaller areas, such US states or within Europe, where availability is similar within the area but culture might have bigger impact.

      I have no idea how you could measure the people who’re in need of those medicine within area though, which would be the most interesting comparison. Are people in Finland more depressed than, say, Estonians?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      05 months ago

      I don’t think it was designed to imply that.

      Are you suggesting that “Antidepressant Consumption” just accomplishes the goal of implying people are more depressed accidentally, then? It’s very effective, even if it tries to hide behind language.