[This Doonesbury cartoon puts a predictable and funny-sad twist on the COVID pandemic. I can’t vouch for Garry Trudeau’s 43%, but I found several studies (see below) that confirm his analysis. Enjoy (?) the cartoon… – BenIndy Contributor Roger Straw]
Doonesbury, by Garry Trudeau
Two important scientific studies:
Journal of the American Medical Association: Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic, July 24, 2023.
“The differences in excess mortality by political party affiliation after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all adults suggest that differences in vaccination attitudes and reported uptake between Republican and Democratic voters may have been a factor in the severity and trajectory of the pandemic in the US.”
Science Direct: The politics of COVID-19: Differences between U.S. red and blue states in COVID-19 regulations and deaths, November 11, 2023.
“CONCLUSION: …this work’s key conclusion is that mass-behavioral changes prescribed through legislation do provide mass-scale dividends in areas that promote these strategies. In highlighting the political divide between COVID-19 legislative and mitigation efforts, researchers do not intend to proselytize one ideology to another but to expand on the notion that differences between dominant political affiliations are equally relevant to consider. Diseases have demonstrated no partisan allegiance, past or present. The individual role of citizens is not without consequence, but to ultimately lessen the aversive effects of COVID-19 and other viral threats in the United States, it is necessary to behave collectively. Given the compelling evidence of mass-behavioral mitigation efforts being successful in pandemic remediation, further legislation should focus on best communicating and implementing these strategies across political landscapes. Focusing on effectively implementing mitigation strategies across ideologies should be paramount if communities are to address disease-based threats with minimal loss and aversive outcomes.”