RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Coronavirus Deaths, Death Rates, Testing, Other Stats
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 12:38 am    ::: Coronavirus Deaths, Death Rates, Testing, Other Stats Reply Reply with quote

In this thread I will calculate from time to time the current death rates from coronavirus worldwide and in various countries. The data will be derived from the Johns Hopkins coronavirus website.

I have a tentative hypothesis that the worldwide death rate is currently distorted upwards by the huge numbers in China, which had grossly insufficient hospital space and likely has a medical system closer to third world than first world, and by Italy, which also has a shortage of hospital space.

The format will be Deaths/Confirmed Cases = Death Rate

As a reference point, the death rate for seasonal flu in the U.S. is about 0.10%.

____________________

Worldwide: 4,630/126,136 = 3.67%

(Editorial comment: Note that the worldwide deaths from CV are only ~20% of the >20,000 deaths from this season's flu in the U.S alone.)

China: 3,172/80,932 = 3.91%

Italy: 827/12,462 = 6.63%

Iran: 354/9,000 = 3.93%

S. Korea: 60/7,755 = 0.77%

France: 48/2,284 = 2.10%

Spain: 55/2,277 = 2.41%

Germany: 3/1,966 = 0.15%

U.S.: 38/1312 = 2.89%

Cruise Ship: 7/696 = 1.00%

Switzerland: 4/652 = 0.61%

Japan: 15/639 = 2.34%

Norway: 0/629 = 0.00%

Denmark: 0/516 = 0.00%

Netherlands: 5/503 = 0.99%

Sweden: 1/500 = 0.20%

U.K.: 8/459 = 1.74%

Belgium: 3/314 = 0.95%

Australia: 3/128 = 2.34%

Canada: 1/117 = 0.85%

Qatar, Austria, Bahrain, Singapore, Malaysia = 0.00%


Last edited by GlennMacGrady on 03/23/20 11:26 am; edited 3 times in total
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8032



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 12:50 am    ::: Re: Coronavirus Death Rates Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:

(Editorial comment: Note that the worldwide deaths from CV are only ~20% of the >20,000 deaths from this season's flu in the U.S


But also note how long the flu has been in circulation and how far it has traveled and to what circulation level, versus COVID-19.

Every time I see those high flu death rates I try to recall hearing about someone I knew or someone famous dying from the flu. Nothing comes to mind, but that doesn’t mean I haven’t forgotten it. I do hear about pneumonia doing people in, particularly older people who are in the hospital for some other issue, but maybe the flu sets up the body to get pneumonia and is considered the cause.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 12:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Looking at the data I just calculated gives me fodder to speculate about the ban that Trump announced yesterday on travelers from Europe, except the U.K.

Methinks the medical gurus advised Trump that the really dangerous "seed source" is Italy. They may not have wanted to single out Italy publicly for diplomatic reasons, and they may thought it conservative to widen the ban to all of contiguous Europe, which is easily accessed by travelers from Italy.

The U.K. is further away on islands and doesn't have that many confirmed cases yet.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 8032



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 12:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:

The U.K. is further away on islands and doesn't have that many confirmed cases yet.


They will likely see a jump since so many hurried home recently to avoid the lockdown of Northern Italy. And the government let them come right on in with no contact. Although the health agency asked them to self-quarantine for 14 days which is good, and something that I don’t believe the USA government was doing.




Last edited by tfan on 03/12/20 1:01 am; edited 1 time in total
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 1:00 am    ::: Re: Coronavirus Death Rates Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
maybe the flu sets up the body to get pneumonia and is considered the cause.


Indeed it does, especially in elderly patients. The CDC's weekly FLUVIEW site has a section that combines flu-pneumonia deaths. I'll bet pneumonia is what ultimately kills lots of the elderly CV patients.

GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 1:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If we subtract Washington state's 30/373 from the U.S. totals in the OP, the remaining 49 states of America have a death rate of: 8/939 = 0.85%.

Those data surely call for cancelling the currently ongoing Iditarod sled dog race in Alaska, or at least forbidding spectators at the finish line. (Sorry, my bad angels come out late at night, along with my mice.)
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:53 am    ::: Re: Coronavirus Death Rates Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
tfan wrote:
maybe the flu sets up the body to get pneumonia and is considered the cause.


Indeed it does, especially in elderly patients. The CDC's weekly FLUVIEW site has a section that combines flu-pneumonia deaths. I'll bet pneumonia is what ultimately kills lots of the elderly CV patients.



Exactly. People die from secondary pneumonia. Or cardiac or renal complications.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8252
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 9:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It will be interesting to see what happens with these numbers over time.

One thing to consider is the countries that have the highest death rates suffered from hospital collapse. If you run out of beds, the numbers are going to skyrocket, but also with a pandemic that is a major concern and a real potential to happen just about everywhere.

The other thing is these numbers are all still relatively small sample sizes. From what we know so far, COVID-19 has a huge variance in its death rate based upon age and other health factors. For instance, kids under 14 are basically at 0 risk of death while people over 80 have a death rate of almost 15%.

So who is getting sick in these initial cases in each country will likely cause major swings in the numbers. If most of the cases are in younger healthier individuals the rate will be significantly lower, while if it hits older people with other health issues it will skew upwards. These general numbers won't tell us the whole story until we know for sure that the cases tracked are actually a representative sample of the entire population.

If someone can find it, a list that tracks country by country rates broken down by age and health would be more informative at this point, imo.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 15266
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 10:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Glenn, fascinating. I didn't realize you had a degree in epidemiology. You've been holding out on us all of this time.


FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 12:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
One thing to consider is the countries that have the highest death rates suffered from hospital collapse. If you run out of beds, the numbers are going to skyrocket, but also with a pandemic that is a major concern and a real potential to happen just about everywhere.



If hospitals are overwhelmed, you'll also need to consider people who die from heart attacks, trauma, etc because there are no resources available to care for them. The furor over the cost of healthcare has ensured that we have no excess resources, whether it be beds, staff, or equipment, in hospitals especially during flu season. Every bed taken by a coronavirus patient means someone else won't receive care.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 1:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

All I did in the OP was apply simple division to data on the Johns Hopkins site, which I've not seen any news organization do. Plus, I research for what seems to be authentic and interesting data on the internet.

I'm also interested in the infection and death rates in each of the U.S. states, but don't feel like doing 50 calculations that are changing daily. But to summarize, there have been U.S. deaths in only five states:

30 - Washington (most clustered in one nursing home of elderly)
4 - California
2 - Florida
1 - New Jersey
1 - South Dakota

Here's a current chart on the infections and deaths in the 50 states:



Next, although testing is very early, the following chart suggests the U.S. infections are already approximating the bell curve predicted by Farr's Law of Epidemics:

Luuuc



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 20234



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 5:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
All I did in the OP was apply simple division to data on the Johns Hopkins site, which I've not seen any news organization do.

Probably because it would be basically irresponsible to publish such a flawed calculation.
Very few countries in the world have been testing comprehensively enough for their number of confirmed cases to be accurate.



_________________
Is there gas in the car?
Yes there's gas in the car.
5thmantheme



Joined: 11 Apr 2016
Posts: 529



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 5:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

from --> https://twitter.com/Tylerjoelb/status/1238178944131760129

This is huge: Ohio Health Dept. Director Amy Acton is saying that evidence of community spread indicates that 1% of Ohioans are currently carrying coronavirus. That's *117,000* people.
Only 5 in Ohio have actually tested positive to this point.


But for the purposes of this thread, the Ohio death rate is zero.

local TV version --> https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/continuing-coverage/coronavirus/ohio-department-of-health-says-100-000-ohioans-are-carrying-coronavirus


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20386



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 7:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Again. Not a scientist or a doctor and numerically illiterate but I just think there’s something going on in this country with the death rate. There are by now so many people in this country who have been exposed to coronavirus. So now a government body in Ohio has this estimation. I don’t doubt that for a minute. I would guesstimate that a million or more in my state have been exposed. Compared to what I believe and what Ohio is estimating is happening there... I’m asserting that people in this country are simply not dying of coronavirus. Maybe no more or less even than the flu.

Tell me how I’m wrong.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 7:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luuuc wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
All I did in the OP was apply simple division to data on the Johns Hopkins site, which I've not seen any news organization do.

Probably because it would be basically irresponsible to publish such a flawed calculation.
Very few countries in the world have been testing comprehensively enough for their number of confirmed cases to be accurate.


So, therefore, it would be irresponsible for any medical, academic or governmental body to publish data on confirmed cases. Or to make predictions of spread based on those data. Or to publish or testify before Congress, or opine in the media, about current or projected infection or fatality rates.

Ridiculous.

Sorry, but the only irresponsible comment is yours.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20386



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 7:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

And honestly, nor will there ever be testing comprehensive enough to allow us to do anything more than guess at the exact number of people who have been exposed. What percentage of them/us get sick, etc.

And the media being responsible?

You would need to take things to the old days where they did a tuberculin skin test. On EVERYONE. Which they once did in this country. And that's never going to happen.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Luuuc



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 20234



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 7:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Luuuc wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
All I did in the OP was apply simple division to data on the Johns Hopkins site, which I've not seen any news organization do.

Probably because it would be basically irresponsible to publish such a flawed calculation.
Very few countries in the world have been testing comprehensively enough for their number of confirmed cases to be accurate.


So, therefore, it would be irresponsible for any medical, academic or governmental body to publish data on confirmed cases. Or to make predictions of spread based on those data. Or to publish or testify before Congress, or opine in the media, about current or projected infection or fatality rates.

Ridiculous.

Sorry, but the only irresponsible comment is yours.

There's nothing wrong with publishing statistics. But people on a basketball board should understand better than most that there are limits to the conclusions you can draw from certain statistics due to both sample size (eg. Layshia Clarendon was the best 3 point shooter in the WNBA last year), and the reliability of how they were obtained (eg. assist numbers is about the closest analogy I have)
People also don't tend to die the instant they are infected, so in the relatively early stages of an outbreak it seems inherently foolish to me to divide one number by the other and draw a conclusion from that, but maybe that's just me. I've been tracking numbers on this thing daily since the start of February and have drawn my own conclusions from them, but from those numbers, death rate is one thing I gave up on quite early for the reasons I previously mentioned.
But I will certainly follow your thread with interest.



_________________
Is there gas in the car?
Yes there's gas in the car.


Last edited by Luuuc on 03/12/20 7:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 7:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Again. Not a scientist or a doctor and numerically illiterate but I just think there’s something going on in this country with the death rate. There are by now so many people in this country who have been exposed to coronavirus. So now a government body in Ohio has this estimation. I don’t doubt that for a minute. I would guesstimate that a million or more in my state have been exposed. Compared to what I believe and what Ohio is estimating is happening there... I’m asserting that people in this country are simply not dying of coronavirus. Maybe no more or less even than the flu.

Tell me how I’m wrong.


These figures don't account for the lag between confirmation and deaths. Given the rapid uptick in cases (numbers have tripled in the US in the past three days), the confirmations are primarily people early in the course of the disease with minimal or no symptoms. The deaths are a population that was infected long enough to become seriously ill. To have a valid number, you need to follow the same group of patients over the course of their disease, not compare a just-diagnosed group with a group who's had time to develop complications.

Or what Luuuc said.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6280
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It's always been logically and statistically obvious that the number of confirmed cases will be less than the number of actual cases. But since the number of actual cases is not now and never will be known, the only way to work with the data, such as computing death rates, is to use the confirmed cases statistics.

Therefore, the death rate statistics that I (and others) are computing can be thought of as worst case death rates, since we know the actual number of cases is larger (by an unknown amount) than the confirmed cases.

One thing I'm trying to tease out in this thread are trends in the number of confirmed cases, deaths, and death rates -- using a uniform computation.

The most important current number is simply deaths. That's not going to change as a function of the number of tests. And everyone who doesn't die remains alive. So, to me, the number of deaths is what we should worry about. Or, more correctly for most countries including the U.S., what we shouldn't be currently worried about . . . because the numbers are so trivial compared to thousands of other lethal agents, such as other illnesses, accidents, natural disasters and criminal acts.

That last paragraph was my opinion. At midnight EDT, I'll post a factual update on the U.S. "death rate" (which I put in quotes just for Luuuc).
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20386



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Again. Not a scientist or a doctor and numerically illiterate but I just think there’s something going on in this country with the death rate. There are by now so many people in this country who have been exposed to coronavirus. So now a government body in Ohio has this estimation. I don’t doubt that for a minute. I would guesstimate that a million or more in my state have been exposed. Compared to what I believe and what Ohio is estimating is happening there... I’m asserting that people in this country are simply not dying of coronavirus. Maybe no more or less even than the flu.

Tell me how I’m wrong.


These figures don't account for the lag between confirmation and deaths. Given the rapid uptick in cases (numbers have tripled in the US in the past three days), the confirmations are primarily people early in the course of the disease with minimal or no symptoms. The deaths are a population that was infected long enough to become seriously ill. To have a valid number, you need to follow the same group of patients over the course of their disease, not compare a just-diagnosed group with a group who's had time to develop complications.

Or what Luuuc said.


Hmm. Okay, I don't understand. Confirmed cases in the US are 'primarily people in the early course of the disease with minimal or no symptoms?'

Okay. I'm not sure about that really. But whatever on that for now.

The 'long enough to become seriously ill' part. That's an assumption, I would contend. You (or that) is assuming that this disease hasn't been in the US as long or significantly as long as it has been in Italy. I can't believe that. Compared to Italy, absolutely hoards of human beings traveled here from China in the months of Dec-Jan. These are numbers that would dwarf the entirety of people entering Italy in that period. And the shipping entering the port at Long Beach with personnel from China.

I don't know, of course, but I'm suggesting that this bug has been here as long as it has been in Italy. Maybe I need to be shown a graph or something. But my gut tells me that California is the first stop in the west for anything and everything coming out of the far east. We'll see.

I'm starting to think that there is a possibility that this won't be as deadly as it has been in Italy and that the death rate might more resemble a seasonal flu. But that's just me.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Your statistical method is flawed. You can't use numerators and denominators from different groups. We'll have to agree to disagree.

What we need to worry about are the subgroup of patients who become seriously ill and threaten to overwhelm our healthcare system. China reported 15-20% of cases were ill enough to require hospitalization. Who knows how valid their statistics are. China also reported a subgroup of younger patients (20's-50's) who died...physicians who were over-exposed and over-worked taking care of patients.


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20386



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So back to that first point. So why, with so few testing kits out there and so few tests being done, are so many confirmed cases among people aren't showing symptoms? Is it because they were on cruise ships or something? It just doesn't seem to follow that people without symptoms would be getting tested for coronavirus.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20386



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FrozenLVFan wrote:
Your statistical method is flawed. You can't use numerators and denominators from different groups. We'll have to agree to disagree.

What we need to worry about are the subgroup of patients who become seriously ill and threaten to overwhelm our healthcare system. China reported 15-20% of cases were ill enough to require hospitalization. Who knows how valid their statistics are. China also reported a subgroup of younger patients (20's-50's) who died...physicians who were over-exposed and over-worked taking care of patients.


I certainly agree with your first sentence in the second paragraph.

So is it possible to be over-exposed to the virus? I've never heard of that before.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1837



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
FrozenLVFan wrote:
Your statistical method is flawed. You can't use numerators and denominators from different groups. We'll have to agree to disagree.

What we need to worry about are the subgroup of patients who become seriously ill and threaten to overwhelm our healthcare system. China reported 15-20% of cases were ill enough to require hospitalization. Who knows how valid their statistics are. China also reported a subgroup of younger patients (20's-50's) who died...physicians who were over-exposed and over-worked taking care of patients.


I certainly agree with your first sentence in the second paragraph.

So is it possible to be over-exposed to the virus? I've never heard of that before.


Lack of gowns, masks, gloves, etc meaning those physicians were exposed to the disease almost continuously.


Luuuc



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 20234



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/12/20 8:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yeah, dosage matters. A small enough dosage of virus particles and due to probabilities, it might not even result in an illness. A high enough dosage and the immune system is immediately overwhelmed and doesn't have time to react and fight it off.
(Disclaimer - That's my viruses-for-dumb-people understanding of it. Not to be taken as medical advice!)



_________________
Is there gas in the car?
Yes there's gas in the car.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
Page 1 of 26

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin