I've been informally tracking numbers on the virus. In looking at deaths by state, so far I've only found the gross number of deaths, not by any ratio, like per thousand. It makes the situation look worse for big states. Anybody found a source for daily deaths by state per population?

---

Rate will depend on testing. Which has been woefully insufficient.

....agree.....we don't know how many people are infected......or carriers.....because testing is less than.....

---

_____________________________________

I reject your reality and substitute my own!

dig deeper at this site

country

then state

[www.worldometers.info]

Agreed, rates from testing are almost subjective, but I'm talking about deaths, which I think would be more accurate.

---

Quote
space-time
dig deeper at this site

country

then state

[www.worldometers.info]

Yep, been all over that site. Still nothing on deaths per population by state that I could find.

If 100 people die in one day in Alaska, that's a big deal if compared 100 people dying in NY. That's why I'm after a ratio, like a mortality rate per population.

---

You can put live links in a spreadsheet, use deaths from state health departments. Just fill the data for population from some page like US States by Population.

---

In tha 360. MRF User Map

Filliam, that would do it. I guess I didn't think about doing any actual work to get what I want.

---

[www.nytimes.com]

It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

Quote
davester
It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

In order to know the death rate, you have to know how many people are infected. That number is not reliable. Locally, they're saying they may never know.

---

Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]

Quote
M A V I C

Quote
davester
It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

In order to know the death rate, you have to know how many people are infected. That number is not reliable. Locally, they're saying they may never know.

you could select 1000 random people from a certain area, test them, see how many are infected and you get a decent estimate of how many people are infected in that area. The trick is selecting a representative samples of the population.

Quote
M A V I C

Quote
davester
It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

In order to know the death rate, you have to know how many people are infected. That number is not reliable. Locally, they're saying they may never know.

No you don't. You are talking about the death per infection rate, which can't be determined in the US because we are on the bottom when it comes to testing. Death rate per population per area does not require information on the infection rate. Obviously, it would be best to know death rate and infection rate, but given the pathetically low testing rate in the US, the raw death rate per population numbers are probably the best indication we have.

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

[twitter.com]


Statistically it's still iffy comparing a state like California to Vermont. But I don't know anybody who is defining and reporting population centers or metropolitan areas.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2020 01:09AM by Mike Johnson.

You are going to get estimates, at best, until this is over. The reason being that you need total number of known cases to compare deaths with.

---

Ed (modelamac)

I think I will just put an OUT OF ORDER
sticker on my head and call it a day.

Another important variable is the relative demos of the community/state/region you are measuring. Part of the Italy problem is that Lombardia is relative "older" than say Wuhan. Another variable that was mentioned earlier is certain behaviors: smoking is very gendered in China which is why men were more vulnerable.

Probably the best data overall is from South Korea thanks to widespread testing but of course the timing and type of their behavioral restrictions are relevant only for their country as each country/state has reacted a little differently.

Quote
modelamac
You are going to get estimates, at best, until this is over. The reason being that you need total number of known cases to compare deaths with.

As davester pointed out, that's required for the case-fatality ratio (which tells you how relatively likely a covid-19 infection specifically is to kill an infected person).

Simply tracking mortality rates is a bit of a blunt instrument (it can't really tell you anything epidemiologically about covid-19 by itself) but it can be used to see if death rates are rising compared to the past - it just can't tell you why.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
davester

Quote
M A V I C

Quote
davester
It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

In order to know the death rate, you have to know how many people are infected. That number is not reliable. Locally, they're saying they may never know.

No you don't. You are talking about the death per infection rate, which can't be determined in the US because we are on the bottom when it comes to testing. Death rate per population per area does not require information on the infection rate. Obviously, it would be best to know death rate and infection rate, but given the pathetically low testing rate in the US, the raw death rate per population numbers are probably the best indication we have.

That rate is published here. I didn't realize you were talking about that one.

---

Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]

Quote
M A V I C

Quote
davester

Quote
M A V I C

Quote
davester
It does seem very odd that death rates seem to be hard to come by. Am I missing something here?

In order to know the death rate, you have to know how many people are infected. That number is not reliable. Locally, they're saying they may never know.

No you don't. You are talking about the death per infection rate, which can't be determined in the US because we are on the bottom when it comes to testing. Death rate per population per area does not require information on the infection rate. Obviously, it would be best to know death rate and infection rate, but given the pathetically low testing rate in the US, the raw death rate per population numbers are probably the best indication we have.

That rate is published here. I didn't realize you were talking about that one.

The other thing I'm reminded of, is that if someone does and hasn't been tested, they haven't been testing post mortem even if they symptoms match. So an actual death count is also hard to come by.

---

Help MacInTouch: Buy from Amazon? use this link [amazon.com]
Mac News & Info: [macintouch.com] [macnn.com] [tuaw.com]
Mac Benchmarks: [barefeats.com]
Used Mac Stuff [FS/T]: LowEndMac Swap List
Mac Software Updates: [macupdate.com]
Fonts: [dafont.com] [fontspace.com]
Online Computer Store With Mac Support: [macsales.com]