AI explanation
As the Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico increased, so did the need for some political purrr-suasion. This resulted in a feline good factor, attracting more people to the state, including a paw-ssionate bunch of aspiring veterinarians. The animal kingdom was clearly feeling the political wave, leading to a 'paw-litical' movement that saw a rise in the number of vets ready to tackle any 'paw-litical' emergencies. The Democrat votes acted as a meow-tivator for these future animal doctors, creating a 'purr-fect' environment for them to thrive. It seems like in New Mexico, even the political landscape couldn't escape the 'claw-ver' influence of our four-legged friends!Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a comical scene in a veterinary clinic in New Mexico, bustling with activity as a group of aspiring veterinarians tend to a diverse array of animals, including cats, dogs, and even a few unexpected guests, like a pot-bellied pig or a parrot. The atmosphere of the clinic should reflect a sense of political enthusiasm, with posters or banners in the background supporting the "paw-litical" movement alongside amusing references to the increasing feline influence in the state. The image should capture the lighthearted and cheerful nature of this peculiar intersection of politics and veterinary care, with a hint of whimsy and playfulness that you might typically find in a humorous Reddit post. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Art nouveau Low poly An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' a funny image you would see on reddit Oragami
ChatGPT: a funny image you would see on reddit
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico, in the following situation: As the Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico increased, so did the need for some political purrr-suasion. This resulted in a feline good factor, attracting more people to the state, including a paw-ssionate bunch of aspiring veterinarians. The animal kingdom was clearly feeling the political wave, leading to a 'paw-litical' movement that saw a rise in the number of vets ready to tackle any 'paw-litical' emergencies. The Democrat votes acted as a meow-tivator for these future animal doctors, creating a 'purr-fect' environment for them to thrive. It seems like in New Mexico, even the political landscape couldn't escape the 'claw-ver' influence of our four-legged friends!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: As Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico increased, more aspiring veterinarians flocked to the state. The political wave created a 'paw-litical' movement, leading to a rise in the number of vets. The influence of our four-legged friends on the political landscape was evident in the state's growing feline good factor.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image you would see on reddit ] and depicting this scene: As Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico increased, more aspiring veterinarians flocked to the state. The political wave created a 'paw-litical' movement, leading to a rise in the number of vets. The influence of our four-legged friends on the political landscape was evident in the state's growing feline good factor. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a comical scene in a veterinary clinic in New Mexico, bustling with activity as a group of aspiring veterinarians tend to a diverse array of animals, including cats, dogs, and even a few unexpected guests, like a pot-bellied pig or a parrot. The atmosphere of the clinic should reflect a sense of political enthusiasm, with posters or banners in the background supporting the "paw-litical" movement alongside amusing references to the increasing feline influence in the state. The image should capture the lighthearted and cheerful nature of this peculiar intersection of politics and veterinary care, with a hint of whimsy and playfulness that you might typically find in a humorous Reddit post.
*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.
I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico caused The number of veterinarians in New Mexico to increase.
AI academic paper
The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians The Journal of Political Canine Studies Jan 2024 |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and p < 0.01 for 2003 to 2020.
Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)
[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwined worlds of politics and veterinary medicine may seem as unrelated as cats and dogs, but our study aims to bring to light the fascinating link between the two in the context of New Mexico. As the political landscape experiences its own wave of change, often referred to as the "blue wave," we sought to explore whether a similar surge could be observed in the veterinary realm, resulting in what we affectionately term the "blue wave of paws."
While it is known that voting patterns can be influenced by a multitude of factors, from demographic shifts to policy preferences, the potential impact of these choices on the proliferation of veterinary professionals is a question often overlooked. Does the alignment of political leanings and support for particular candidates have any bearing on the number of veterinarians populating the Land of Enchantment? Our research aims to tackle this question with a mix of data analysis and lighthearted curiosity that is sure to raise eyebrows, if not whiskers, in the academic community.
The state of New Mexico serves as an intriguing case study for this investigation. With its diverse landscapes, ranging from arid deserts to lush forests, and a population known for its passion for animals, it presents an ideal setting to explore potential correlations between political affiliations and the presence of veterinary professionals. By harnessing data from prestigious sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we endeavor to uncover any meaningful associations that may have gone unnoticed amidst the hustle and bustle of political fervor.
What lies ahead is not just a statistical analysis of numbers, but a journey into the uncharted territory where politics and paws intertwine. So, fasten your seatbelts, or perhaps leashes, as we embark on this whimsical yet scientifically robust exploration of the "blue wave of paws."
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.
Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.
Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwined worlds of politics and veterinary medicine may seem as unrelated as cats and dogs, but our study aims to bring to light the fascinating link between the two in the context of New Mexico. As the political landscape experiences its own wave of change, often referred to as the "blue wave," we sought to explore whether a similar surge could be observed in the veterinary realm, resulting in what we affectionately term the "blue wave of paws."
While it is known that voting patterns can be influenced by a multitude of factors, from demographic shifts to policy preferences, the potential impact of these choices on the proliferation of veterinary professionals is a question often overlooked. Does the alignment of political leanings and support for particular candidates have any bearing on the number of veterinarians populating the Land of Enchantment? Our research aims to tackle this question with a mix of data analysis and lighthearted curiosity that is sure to raise eyebrows, if not whiskers, in the academic community.
The state of New Mexico serves as an intriguing case study for this investigation. With its diverse landscapes, ranging from arid deserts to lush forests, and a population known for its passion for animals, it presents an ideal setting to explore potential correlations between political affiliations and the presence of veterinary professionals. By harnessing data from prestigious sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we endeavor to uncover any meaningful associations that may have gone unnoticed amidst the hustle and bustle of political fervor.
What lies ahead is not just a statistical analysis of numbers, but a journey into the uncharted territory where politics and paws intertwine. So, fasten your seatbelts, or perhaps leashes, as we embark on this whimsical yet scientifically robust exploration of the "blue wave of paws."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Several academic studies have delved into the complex interplay between political behaviors and societal phenomena. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a correlation between voting patterns and various aspects of community life, shedding light on the potential influence of political dynamics. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" examine the sociological implications of political affiliations and their effects on professional landscapes, hinting at underlying connections that warrant further exploration. However, the specific relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians in the state remains largely unexplored in the academic literature.
Turning to related non-fiction literature, "Animals in Politics" by Lorem Ipsum offers a comprehensive analysis of the intersection between animal-related issues and political landscapes, providing a broader context for our investigation. In a similar vein, "The Blue State of Mind" by Ipsum Lorem explores the psychological underpinnings of political affiliations, which may have indirect implications for our proposed correlation. Meanwhile, "Paws and Policies: A Comprehensive Guide" by Ipsum delves into the impact of public policies on animal welfare, hinting at the potential influences of political choices on the veterinary profession.
When considering fictional works, "Tales of Whiskers and Winners" by J.K. Pawling conjures whimsical imagery that resonates with our investigation, playfully intertwining the fates of political candidates and the welfare of animal companions. Additionally, "The Clawment Factor" by John Grisham invites readers into a world where legal and political dramas unfold alongside the enigmatic allure of veterinary practices.
Moreover, enlightening perspectives have emerged from social media discussions. In a tweet by @PawsOfDemocracy, the user notes a curious surge in veterinarian clinics in areas with strong Democratic support, hinting at a potential correlation that aligns with our proposed research focus. Furthermore, @BlueWavePaws shares anecdotal accounts of political volunteers being accompanied by furry friends, inspiring our exploratory journey into the "blue wave of paws."
Thus, while initial scholarly inquiries and theoretical frameworks provide a foundation for understanding the complexities at the crossroads of politics and veterinary care, a whimsical and multifaceted exploration of the literature reveals undercurrents of potential correlations and unexpected connections.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 to 2020
Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.
Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwined worlds of politics and veterinary medicine may seem as unrelated as cats and dogs, but our study aims to bring to light the fascinating link between the two in the context of New Mexico. As the political landscape experiences its own wave of change, often referred to as the "blue wave," we sought to explore whether a similar surge could be observed in the veterinary realm, resulting in what we affectionately term the "blue wave of paws."
While it is known that voting patterns can be influenced by a multitude of factors, from demographic shifts to policy preferences, the potential impact of these choices on the proliferation of veterinary professionals is a question often overlooked. Does the alignment of political leanings and support for particular candidates have any bearing on the number of veterinarians populating the Land of Enchantment? Our research aims to tackle this question with a mix of data analysis and lighthearted curiosity that is sure to raise eyebrows, if not whiskers, in the academic community.
The state of New Mexico serves as an intriguing case study for this investigation. With its diverse landscapes, ranging from arid deserts to lush forests, and a population known for its passion for animals, it presents an ideal setting to explore potential correlations between political affiliations and the presence of veterinary professionals. By harnessing data from prestigious sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we endeavor to uncover any meaningful associations that may have gone unnoticed amidst the hustle and bustle of political fervor.
What lies ahead is not just a statistical analysis of numbers, but a journey into the uncharted territory where politics and paws intertwine. So, fasten your seatbelts, or perhaps leashes, as we embark on this whimsical yet scientifically robust exploration of the "blue wave of paws."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The research team embarked on a quest to untangle the web of data, utilizing a mixture of statistical analysis, online sleuthing, and a touch of whimsy. First, an extensive trawl through the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics was conducted, harnessing data from the years 2003 to 2020 to capture the ebb and flow of political tides and veterinary prowess.
To quantify the intensity of political fervor, the number of votes garnered by Democratic senators in New Mexico elections was tallied with meticulous care, with a keen eye for any fluctuations resembling a wave – perhaps more azure than the ocean, one might say. Meanwhile, the density of veterinary professionals plying their trade in the Land of Enchantment was gauged, with a nod to those tireless healers of our furry friends.
Armed with this wealth of numerical bounty, the team employed the venerable tool of statistical analysis, calculating a correlation coefficient that would put even the most well-trained canines to shame with its precision. Subsequently, the reliable ol' p-value was invoked to discern the likelihood of our findings being a mere fluke, or indeed, a revealing insight into the interconnected tapestry of "paw-litics" and professional pet care.
In addition, a robust sensitivity analysis was conducted to ensure that our results stood the test of scrutiny, akin to a thorough check-up at the veterinarian's office. We sought to rule out any confounding variables that might have muddied the waters of our investigation, leaving behind only the crisp clarity of a well-groomed poodle.
Furthermore, a series of rigorous cross-validation procedures were employed to confirm the robustness of our findings, ensuring that they were not merely a statistical anomaly – a red herring, if you will – but a genuine nugget of insight into the nexus of political currents and veterinary landscapes.
It is with undeniably uptight confidence, akin to a Chihuahua on a cold day, that we present our methodological approach, hoping to evoke both analytical scrutiny and a chuckle or two, just as a faithful hound might nudge at your hand for a good pat.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .
For the time period 2003 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9307632, r-squared of 0.8663202, and p < 0.01.
One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intertwined worlds of politics and veterinary medicine may seem as unrelated as cats and dogs, but our study aims to bring to light the fascinating link between the two in the context of New Mexico. As the political landscape experiences its own wave of change, often referred to as the "blue wave," we sought to explore whether a similar surge could be observed in the veterinary realm, resulting in what we affectionately term the "blue wave of paws."
While it is known that voting patterns can be influenced by a multitude of factors, from demographic shifts to policy preferences, the potential impact of these choices on the proliferation of veterinary professionals is a question often overlooked. Does the alignment of political leanings and support for particular candidates have any bearing on the number of veterinarians populating the Land of Enchantment? Our research aims to tackle this question with a mix of data analysis and lighthearted curiosity that is sure to raise eyebrows, if not whiskers, in the academic community.
The state of New Mexico serves as an intriguing case study for this investigation. With its diverse landscapes, ranging from arid deserts to lush forests, and a population known for its passion for animals, it presents an ideal setting to explore potential correlations between political affiliations and the presence of veterinary professionals. By harnessing data from prestigious sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we endeavor to uncover any meaningful associations that may have gone unnoticed amidst the hustle and bustle of political fervor.
What lies ahead is not just a statistical analysis of numbers, but a journey into the uncharted territory where politics and paws intertwine. So, fasten your seatbelts, or perhaps leashes, as we embark on this whimsical yet scientifically robust exploration of the "blue wave of paws."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our data analysis reveal a remarkably strong correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians practicing in the state. The correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 suggests a highly positive linear relationship between these two variables. Moreover, with an r-squared value of 0.8663202, approximately 86.63% of the variation in the number of veterinarians can be explained by the variation in Democrat votes for Senators. The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates a statistically significant relationship, affirming the robustness of our findings and its unlikely occurrence by mere chance.
Figure 1 illustrates this compelling correlation, resembling a pair of political and veterinary "paw-tners" strolling along a path of statistical significance. The scatterplot showcases a tightly clustered cloud of data points, mirroring the close association observed between the two variables. It seems that in the enchanting state of New Mexico, as the Democrat votes for Senators surge, so too does the presence of veterinary professionals, akin to a "blue wave of paws" washing over the landscape.
Indeed, these findings prompt speculation about the potential mechanisms underlying this interconnectedness. Perhaps the allure of the political arena exerts an inexplicable pull on individuals with a penchant for caring for creatures great and small. Or could it be that the collective resonance of "meow-ticulate" advocacy for animal well-being inspires a parallel surge in political engagement? These questions beckon further inquiry into the intricate dynamics of "paw-litical" influence and the role it plays in shaping the distribution of veterinary expertise.
While our study sheds light on this curious correlation, it also underscores the need for future research to delve deeper into the underlying causal pathways and the broader applicability of these findings. The unexpected connection we have unearthed between political preferences and the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico calls for a more nuanced exploration, one that recognizes the influence of "paw-litics" on the care and welfare of our beloved animal companions.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Several academic studies have delved into the complex interplay between political behaviors and societal phenomena. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a correlation between voting patterns and various aspects of community life, shedding light on the potential influence of political dynamics. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" examine the sociological implications of political affiliations and their effects on professional landscapes, hinting at underlying connections that warrant further exploration. However, the specific relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians in the state remains largely unexplored in the academic literature.
Turning to related non-fiction literature, "Animals in Politics" by Lorem Ipsum offers a comprehensive analysis of the intersection between animal-related issues and political landscapes, providing a broader context for our investigation. In a similar vein, "The Blue State of Mind" by Ipsum Lorem explores the psychological underpinnings of political affiliations, which may have indirect implications for our proposed correlation. Meanwhile, "Paws and Policies: A Comprehensive Guide" by Ipsum delves into the impact of public policies on animal welfare, hinting at the potential influences of political choices on the veterinary profession.
When considering fictional works, "Tales of Whiskers and Winners" by J.K. Pawling conjures whimsical imagery that resonates with our investigation, playfully intertwining the fates of political candidates and the welfare of animal companions. Additionally, "The Clawment Factor" by John Grisham invites readers into a world where legal and political dramas unfold alongside the enigmatic allure of veterinary practices.
Moreover, enlightening perspectives have emerged from social media discussions. In a tweet by @PawsOfDemocracy, the user notes a curious surge in veterinarian clinics in areas with strong Democratic support, hinting at a potential correlation that aligns with our proposed research focus. Furthermore, @BlueWavePaws shares anecdotal accounts of political volunteers being accompanied by furry friends, inspiring our exploratory journey into the "blue wave of paws."
Thus, while initial scholarly inquiries and theoretical frameworks provide a foundation for understanding the complexities at the crossroads of politics and veterinary care, a whimsical and multifaceted exploration of the literature reveals undercurrents of potential correlations and unexpected connections.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our data analysis reveal a remarkably strong correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians practicing in the state. The correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 suggests a highly positive linear relationship between these two variables. Moreover, with an r-squared value of 0.8663202, approximately 86.63% of the variation in the number of veterinarians can be explained by the variation in Democrat votes for Senators. The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates a statistically significant relationship, affirming the robustness of our findings and its unlikely occurrence by mere chance.
Figure 1 illustrates this compelling correlation, resembling a pair of political and veterinary "paw-tners" strolling along a path of statistical significance. The scatterplot showcases a tightly clustered cloud of data points, mirroring the close association observed between the two variables. It seems that in the enchanting state of New Mexico, as the Democrat votes for Senators surge, so too does the presence of veterinary professionals, akin to a "blue wave of paws" washing over the landscape.
Indeed, these findings prompt speculation about the potential mechanisms underlying this interconnectedness. Perhaps the allure of the political arena exerts an inexplicable pull on individuals with a penchant for caring for creatures great and small. Or could it be that the collective resonance of "meow-ticulate" advocacy for animal well-being inspires a parallel surge in political engagement? These questions beckon further inquiry into the intricate dynamics of "paw-litical" influence and the role it plays in shaping the distribution of veterinary expertise.
While our study sheds light on this curious correlation, it also underscores the need for future research to delve deeper into the underlying causal pathways and the broader applicability of these findings. The unexpected connection we have unearthed between political preferences and the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico calls for a more nuanced exploration, one that recognizes the influence of "paw-litics" on the care and welfare of our beloved animal companions.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The results of our study have provided compelling evidence in support of the previously unexplored correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians in the state. Our findings align with prior research that has hinted at the complex interplay between political behaviors and societal phenomena. The striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01 underscore the robustness and statistical significance of this unexpected relationship, offering credence to the whimsical musings and unconventional ideas that have permeated both academic and non-academic literature.
Drawing upon the literature review of "Doe and Jones," which highlighted the sociological implications of political affiliations and their effects on professional landscapes, our study's results offer tangible empirical support for the underlying connections between "paw-litics" and the veterinary profession. This unexpected coherence between two seemingly disparate realms calls to mind the adage that "birds of a feather flock together" – or in this case, perhaps it should be "paws of a similar political persuasion flock together."
Furthermore, the fictional works examined in our literature review, such as "Tales of Whiskers and Winners" by J.K. Pawling and "The Clawment Factor" by John Grisham, although seemingly lighthearted in nature, have inadvertently laid the groundwork for our study by conjuring up a fantastical world where political and veterinary domains intertwine. Our findings now serve to add a touch of empirical weight to these humorous imaginings, as we have demonstrated the tangible association between political votes and the presence of veterinary professionals.
Moreover, the insights gleaned from social media discussions, particularly the tweet by @PawsOfDemocracy and the anecdotal accounts shared by @BlueWavePaws, have resonated with our research findings by hinting at the existence of a potential correlation. Indeed, the discovery of a substantive relationship between Democrat votes for Senators and the number of veterinarians practicing in New Mexico validates these playful hints and underscores the intriguing undercurrents of potential connections proffered in these virtual exchanges.
In conclusion, while our study has elegantly substantiated the unexpected connection between political preferences and the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico, it also accentuates the need for continued inquiry into the nuances of this correlation. The whimsicality and multifaceted nature of our investigation, fueled by a hint of pun and a splash of humor, have unveiled undercurrents of potential correlations and unexpected connections, prompting further exploration into the interplay between "paw-litics" and the care and welfare of our beloved animal companions.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and The number of veterinarians in New Mexico. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intertwined worlds of politics and veterinary medicine may seem as unrelated as cats and dogs, but our study aims to bring to light the fascinating link between the two in the context of New Mexico. As the political landscape experiences its own wave of change, often referred to as the "blue wave," we sought to explore whether a similar surge could be observed in the veterinary realm, resulting in what we affectionately term the "blue wave of paws."
While it is known that voting patterns can be influenced by a multitude of factors, from demographic shifts to policy preferences, the potential impact of these choices on the proliferation of veterinary professionals is a question often overlooked. Does the alignment of political leanings and support for particular candidates have any bearing on the number of veterinarians populating the Land of Enchantment? Our research aims to tackle this question with a mix of data analysis and lighthearted curiosity that is sure to raise eyebrows, if not whiskers, in the academic community.
The state of New Mexico serves as an intriguing case study for this investigation. With its diverse landscapes, ranging from arid deserts to lush forests, and a population known for its passion for animals, it presents an ideal setting to explore potential correlations between political affiliations and the presence of veterinary professionals. By harnessing data from prestigious sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we endeavor to uncover any meaningful associations that may have gone unnoticed amidst the hustle and bustle of political fervor.
What lies ahead is not just a statistical analysis of numbers, but a journey into the uncharted territory where politics and paws intertwine. So, fasten your seatbelts, or perhaps leashes, as we embark on this whimsical yet scientifically robust exploration of the "blue wave of paws."
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our data analysis reveal a remarkably strong correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico and the number of veterinarians practicing in the state. The correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 suggests a highly positive linear relationship between these two variables. Moreover, with an r-squared value of 0.8663202, approximately 86.63% of the variation in the number of veterinarians can be explained by the variation in Democrat votes for Senators. The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates a statistically significant relationship, affirming the robustness of our findings and its unlikely occurrence by mere chance.
Figure 1 illustrates this compelling correlation, resembling a pair of political and veterinary "paw-tners" strolling along a path of statistical significance. The scatterplot showcases a tightly clustered cloud of data points, mirroring the close association observed between the two variables. It seems that in the enchanting state of New Mexico, as the Democrat votes for Senators surge, so too does the presence of veterinary professionals, akin to a "blue wave of paws" washing over the landscape.
Indeed, these findings prompt speculation about the potential mechanisms underlying this interconnectedness. Perhaps the allure of the political arena exerts an inexplicable pull on individuals with a penchant for caring for creatures great and small. Or could it be that the collective resonance of "meow-ticulate" advocacy for animal well-being inspires a parallel surge in political engagement? These questions beckon further inquiry into the intricate dynamics of "paw-litical" influence and the role it plays in shaping the distribution of veterinary expertise.
While our study sheds light on this curious correlation, it also underscores the need for future research to delve deeper into the underlying causal pathways and the broader applicability of these findings. The unexpected connection we have unearthed between political preferences and the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico calls for a more nuanced exploration, one that recognizes the influence of "paw-litics" on the care and welfare of our beloved animal companions.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our study illuminates the "paw-litical" landscape of New Mexico, uncovering the surprising alignment between Democrat votes for Senators and the number of veterinarians in the state. The robust correlation coefficient and statistically significant p-value highlight the unignorable connection, leading us to ponder whether the "blue wave of paws" is, in fact, a "paw-some" force shaping the veterinary realm.
The relationship between political preferences and the proliferation of veterinary professionals raises questions that tickle the mind. Does the act of casting a ballot inspire a "paws-itive" surge in individuals choosing to dedicate their lives to animal care, or do the compelling arguments of "meow-ticulate" advocacy resonate beyond the ballot box, creating a ripple effect in the realm of furry companions?
As we reflect on the whimsical journey of our research, one cannot help but wonder about the nuanced dynamics at play. Perhaps the call of "paw-litics" reverberates beyond policy debates, shaping the very fabric of professional vocations. Or perchance, a greater force at play amplifies both political engagement and the call to safeguard the welfare of our four-legged friends.
Despite the clarity of our findings, this exploration serves as merely the tip of the "ice-bark." Further research is warranted to unravel the intricate pathways through which "paw-litics" intertwine with the furry domain of veterinary expertise. Nonetheless, for now, this study stands as a "paws-itively" compelling testament to the unforeseen ways in which our political choices may leave a lasting "paw-print" on the world of veterinary care.
Therefore, we assert with utmost sincerity and a hint of whimsy that no more research is needed in this area as it's already been paw-fectly captured in our study.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Political Canine Studies
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The National Institute for Political Pawspectives
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians with an abstract of This research examines the intriguing relationship between the voting patterns of Democrats in New Mexico when electing senators and the density of veterinarians in the state. Using data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study spans from 2003 to 2020, revealing a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9307632 and a p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings shed light on the potential influence of "paw-litics" on the presence of veterinary professionals in New Mexico. This unexpected connection prompts further investigation into the complex interplay between political preferences and the care of our furry companions.
ChatGPT:
New Mexico, Democrat voters, voting patterns, senators, veterinarians, correlation, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Bureau of Labor Statistics, correlation coefficient, paw-litics, political preferences, furry companions, New Mexico demographics.
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Democrat votes for Senators in New MexicoDetailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Democrat Senate candidates in New Mexico
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico
The number of veterinarians in New Mexico
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of veterinarians in New Mexico
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of veterinarians in New Mexico
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.
r2 = 0.8663202 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 86.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of veterinarians in New Mexico) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico) over the 6 years from 2003 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00702. 0.0070246422906171035000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.
But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.
Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.93 in 0.702% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 142 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.
[ 0.49, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.
This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!
All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.
Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
2006 | 2008 | 2012 | 2014 | 2018 | 2020 | |
Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico (Total votes) | 394365 | 505128 | 395717 | 286409 | 376998 | 474483 |
The number of veterinarians in New Mexico (Veterinarians) | 400 | 450 | 390 | 370 | 390 | 460 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- Lack of causal connection: There is probably
Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied. - Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple
Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is. - Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
Try it yourself
You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.
Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"
Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.
Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.
Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.
Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"
If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:
"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."
# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats
# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):
# Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)
# Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
r_squared = correlation**2
return correlation, r_squared, p_value
# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([394365,505128,395717,286409,376998,474483,])
array_2 = np.array([400,450,390,370,390,460,])
array_1_name = "Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico"
array_2_name = "The number of veterinarians in New Mexico"
# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)
# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)
Reuseable content
You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.
For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."
When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.
Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.
Download images for these variables:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Democrat votes for Senators in New Mexico
- Line chart for only The number of veterinarians in New Mexico
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: The Blue Wave of Paws: The Curious Correlation Between Democrat Votes for Senators in New Mexico and the Number of Veterinarians
Your rating is pure awesomeness!
Correlation ID: 4397 · Black Variable ID: 26284 · Red Variable ID: 11852