It's not discussed in the article. The article discussed, race, sex, etc. and then makes an assertion that it "wouldn't move much from 4.9."

That's completely false when using geolocation. We can estimate from crime stats easily that a tour of the country avoiding the highest murder rate parts of the country would land you very close to a zero murder rate.

Among healthy adults, that's essentially a near zero chance of death.

That isn't surprising. Attending a festival in a desert with little oversight and lots of drugs is obviously more dangerous than buying groceries in white suburbia.

4.9 is simply not the relevant number unless your goal is to try to say that the event is on par with taking a walk in the wrong part of town.

But I'm certain that wasn't the point of the article. It's dishonest, is my point.