The CardBoard
Almost 200K dead in the US - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Almost 200K dead in the US (/showthread.php?tid=20453)



Almost 200K dead in the US - M T - 09-16-2020

Per the CDC, the US will pass 200,000 dead from COVID-19 probably this weekend orMonday. (195K at Sep 16 2020 12:16PM; 961 in last day).

The daily death numbers can be seen at
  https://covidtracking.com/data/charts/us-daily-deaths

I find it interesting and bothersome that the fall-off from the peak in mid-August is much slower than the fall-off from the peak in mid-April.
(Remember, deaths are 3 weeks or a month delayed from cases.)
The earlier, faster drop is almost certainly due to the shelter-in-place reaction to that steep rise in March to mid-April.
The rise throughout July was not as steep, but is steeper than the fall from the resulting peak.

The current daily rate of 844 deaths (7 day average as of 9/15) corresponds to a yearly total of 308K.  That is approximately 11 percent of the (previous) death rate for the country (2017 yearly deaths 2.8M; live births 3.8M).   If things don't change for the better or worse, about 1 of every 10 deaths will be COVID related (308K / (2.8M + 308K)).  
In 2017, the broad category "Diseases of the heart" accounted for 23% of deaths, while "malignant neoplasms" accounted for 22%, while flu & pneumonia accounted for 55.6K deaths.

Putting 200K and 844 deaths/day in perspective: 
   200K is nearly twice the total number of fatalities in all US military events after WWII.
   If the US were SIMULTANEOUSLY fighting the US Civil War, WWI, and WWII, the death count would be 946 per day.

This is assuming there are no lingering health effects from a first (or nth) round of COVID-19 that add to death figures in the future.  It's only been 7 months since the first known death in the US.

------

Oh yea, let's open things up.  We want our MTV and football and dining at restaurants and more!   We can print our money with a new motto "In vaccine, we trust".


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - OutsiderFan - 09-16-2020

If you look at excess deaths, it's likely the United States has had over 230,000 deaths to Covid so far.  But really, I don't know that there is that big of a difference in terms of public health emergency with 230,000 and 200,000.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - teejers1 - 09-16-2020

(09-16-2020, 01:59 PM)M T Wrote:  Per the CDC, the US will pass 200,000 dead from COVID-19 probably this weekend orMonday. (195K at Sep 16 2020 12:16PM; 961 in last day).

The daily death numbers can be seen at
  https://covidtracking.com/data/charts/us-daily-deaths

I find it interesting and bothersome that the fall-off from the peak in mid-August is much slower than the fall-off from the peak in mid-April.
(Remember, deaths are 3 weeks or a month delayed from cases.)
The earlier, faster drop is almost certainly due to the shelter-in-place reaction to that steep rise in March to mid-April.
The rise throughout July was not as steep, but is steeper than the fall from the resulting peak.

The current daily rate of 844 deaths (7 day average as of 9/15) corresponds to a yearly total of 308K.  That is approximately 11 percent of the (previous) death rate for the country (2017 yearly deaths 2.8M; live births 3.8M).   If things don't change for the better or worse, about 1 of every 10 deaths will be COVID related (308K / (2.8M + 308K)).  
In 2017, the broad category "Diseases of the heart" accounted for 23% of deaths, while "malignant neoplasms" accounted for 22%, while flu & pneumonia accounted for 55.6K deaths.

Putting 200K and 844 deaths/day in perspective: 
   200K is nearly twice the total number of fatalities in all US military events after WWII.
   If the US were SIMULTANEOUSLY fighting the US Civil War, WWI, and WWII, the death count would be 946 per day.

This is assuming there are no lingering health effects from a first (or nth) round of COVID-19 that add to death figures in the future.  It's only been 7 months since the first known death in the US.

------

Oh yea, let's open things up.  We want our MTV and football and dining at restaurants and more!   We can print our money with a new motto "In vaccine, we trust".

Let's be brutally frank here.  If the death profile of the 200,000 folks who perished were 20-50 year old working and tax-paying mothers and fathers (as opposed to grandmothers/grandfathers . . . or great grandmothers/grandfathers), then the reaction would be different.  It is not - by and large those dying are old and infirm (in some manner).  Thus, we have what we have.

This goes all the way back to Mick's original question way back when about the wisdom of shut down, given the profile of those most adversely affected.  It's harsh.  But it's "truth" to use a term bandied about in these parts.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - Farm93 - 09-16-2020

(09-16-2020, 05:03 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  
(09-16-2020, 01:59 PM)M T Wrote:  Per the CDC, the US will pass 200,000 dead from COVID-19 probably this weekend orMonday. (195K at Sep 16 2020 12:16PM; 961 in last day).

The daily death numbers can be seen at
  https://covidtracking.com/data/charts/us-daily-deaths

I find it interesting and bothersome that the fall-off from the peak in mid-August is much slower than the fall-off from the peak in mid-April.
(Remember, deaths are 3 weeks or a month delayed from cases.)
The earlier, faster drop is almost certainly due to the shelter-in-place reaction to that steep rise in March to mid-April.
The rise throughout July was not as steep, but is steeper than the fall from the resulting peak.

The current daily rate of 844 deaths (7 day average as of 9/15) corresponds to a yearly total of 308K.  That is approximately 11 percent of the (previous) death rate for the country (2017 yearly deaths 2.8M; live births 3.8M).   If things don't change for the better or worse, about 1 of every 10 deaths will be COVID related (308K / (2.8M + 308K)).  
In 2017, the broad category "Diseases of the heart" accounted for 23% of deaths, while "malignant neoplasms" accounted for 22%, while flu & pneumonia accounted for 55.6K deaths.

Putting 200K and 844 deaths/day in perspective: 
   200K is nearly twice the total number of fatalities in all US military events after WWII.
   If the US were SIMULTANEOUSLY fighting the US Civil War, WWI, and WWII, the death count would be 946 per day.

This is assuming there are no lingering health effects from a first (or nth) round of COVID-19 that add to death figures in the future.  It's only been 7 months since the first known death in the US.

------

Oh yea, let's open things up.  We want our MTV and football and dining at restaurants and more!   We can print our money with a new motto "In vaccine, we trust".

Let's be brutally frank here.  If the death profile of the 200,000 folks who perished were 20-50 year old working and tax-paying mothers and fathers (as opposed to grandmothers/grandfathers . . . or great grandmothers/grandfathers), then the reaction would be different.  It is not - by and large those dying are old and infirm (in some manner).  Thus, we have what we have.

This goes all the way back to Mick's original question way back when about the wisdom of shut down, given the profile of those most adversely affected.  It's harsh.  But it's "truth" to use a term bandied about in these parts.
Apparently depends on which 20-50 year-old moms we are talking about.
If we are talking about moms living under Blue State Governors and/or Blue City Mayors then I suspect all would be acceptable to POTUS.  Since POTUS often removes non-GOP state sub-groups to imply he did a good job.    

Ultimately as long as the USA death toll is under the 2 million (an initial projection if the USA did nothing), then POTUS45 will certainly declare he has done a good job.   And I should say that is the benchmark as long as we are under that specific estimate.   The benchmark has been different numbers right until we blew past those numbers.   <60K, <100K and now <240K have all been used as the marker of success in the last 5 months. 

We are still using 240K for now, but with a number of superspreader (MAGA Rallies, ACC football tailgates, college and HS football games, open schools without mandatory masks, etc.) events in September, we are going to blast through 240K in a few weeks.

The real benchmark is the Dow Jones Index or perhaps the S&P500.   As long as the stock market can be supported by easy monetary and fiscal policies then all is fine. 

USA citizen deaths? IIWII


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - oregontim - 09-16-2020

We ought to be dealing with the impossible-to-specify real number, something in the order of excess deaths, the difference between the actual deaths and what might have been had our deaths per million been roughly similar to some agreed-upon international standard.

Looking at the Wikipedia reading of deaths per 100K, as of mid September, I see some easy ways to slant the analysis. If I compare us to UK, Sweden, and Italy, we're in the same general ballpark. If I compare us to Germany, France, Australia, New Zealand, or Japan, we're 5-10 or more times worse.

Like on so many topics, with this one too, if you tell me the conclusion you want, I can find you the data to prove it.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - Farm93 - 09-16-2020

(09-16-2020, 06:42 PM)oregontim Wrote:  We ought to be dealing with the impossible-to-specify real number, something in the order of excess deaths, the difference between the actual deaths and what might have been had our deaths per million been roughly similar to some agreed-upon international standard.

Looking at the Wikipedia reading of deaths per 100K, as of mid September, I see some easy ways to slant the analysis. If I compare us to UK, Sweden, and Italy, we're in the same general ballpark. If I compare us to Germany, France, Australia, New Zealand, or Japan, we're 5-10 or more times worse.

Like on so many topics, with this one too, if you tell me the conclusion you want, I can find you the data to prove it.
Italy was crushed as the first western country to see a major outbreak.   Italy is the outlier, for sure.   And FWIW since June they've been doing OK.

The UK and Sweden both had officials that either were very slow to appreciate the dangers and/or believed herd immunity was a decent strategy.   So any country that compares its COVID19 results to those two countries is definitely not in a good place.   Even to this day those in Norway are discouraged from venturing into Sweden even for day trips.

Ultimately we know we are doing poorly because most of the developed world has travel warnings or bans for travel to the USA.  Officials around the world paid to review the health care stats, and are not in the Trump administration, know the USA is a massive COVID19 danger zone.    

That's all not meaningful though.   

If you just eliminate all of the deaths in states with Democratic governors then the USA death count is much lower.  ;)

Problem solved!!!


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - oregontim - 09-16-2020

(09-16-2020, 08:06 PM)Farm93 Wrote:  If you just eliminate all of the deaths in states with Democratic governors then the USA death count is much lower.  ;)

Problem solved!!!

OMG yes, I just saw that clip ... that's actually what he said ... sometimes you have to laugh because, well, what else can you do?


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - Farm93 - 09-16-2020

(09-16-2020, 08:59 PM)oregontim Wrote:  
(09-16-2020, 08:06 PM)Farm93 Wrote:  If you just eliminate all of the deaths in states with Democratic governors then the USA death count is much lower.  ;)

Problem solved!!!

OMG yes, I just saw that clip ... that's actually what he said ... sometimes you have to laugh because, well, what else can you do?
I opt for crying or some form of inappropriate language depends on the day.

At the end of the day, I suspect President Trump's re-election campaign team is crying or cursing too.   The anti-Trump ads in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada and North Carolina all got much easier to create.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - OutsiderFan - 09-17-2020

I regretfully just saw that clip and reacted thusly:

My head started shaking and I thought “what a blithering idiot, is this like an advertisement to show how manifestly unfit for the job he is? Could we possibly have anyone worse? I simply can’t fathom this guy getting voted in again.”

As for the deaths in the 20-50 range, why not just exterminate anyone over 55 or 65? I mean most people aren’t net producing then, so why have them be around at all?


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - fullmetal - 09-17-2020

I think this quote is real.

Quote:It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.

Hubert Humphrey

Who would have ever imagined a government taking care of the less fortunate in its society?


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - BostonCard - 09-17-2020

Once upon a time, I remember both sides of the aisle effectively exploiting "pushing grandma off a cliff" for negative advertising.  Younger people might not care for the elderly generally, but they do care for their parents and grandparents.

Also, grandmas vote.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewster/2020/09/11/biden-is-outperforming-trump-with-seniors---and-past-democratic-candidates-obama-clinton/#369a6cd338f9

BC


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - Mick - 09-17-2020

(09-17-2020, 03:52 AM)fullmetal Wrote:  I think this quote is real.

Quote:It was once said that the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.

Hubert Humphrey

Who would have ever imagined a government taking care of the less fortunate in its society?

Everyone who votes, as Mitt Romney both discovered and (to his chagrin) enunciated.  It's why Social Security is the Third Rail of Politics.  It's why 50% of the federal budget goes to some form of safety net.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - Goose - 09-17-2020

(09-17-2020, 08:58 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Once upon a time, I remember both sides of the aisle effectively exploiting "pushing grandma off a cliff" for negative advertising.  Younger people might not care for the elderly generally, but they do care for their parents and grandparents.
I think we need to judge people by what they actually do, not what they say they should do. I think that it is perfectly possible to have so much cognitive dissonance that you on the one hand love your parents/grandparents and on the other hand do things that endanger them. In point of fact,lots of people are more interested in going to the bar with friends. That is what they do. Most of the time, it doesn't cause any problems, so why not go? They won't push Grandma off a cliff, but they also won't do what it takes to make sure she doesn't fall off one. Not their problem. Damn shame, but I guess her number just came up.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - fullmetal - 09-18-2020

I think the prevalence of senior homes (or assisted living) indicates how infeasible it is for modern wage-earners to care for and house their elderly relatives while also raising children and working a typical job.  Single-family housing isn't really built for it, and the increased longevity in America disproportionately increases the level of care needed for those living into older, twilight years.

So I'm not too surprised that there's a segment of the population who would "let" Grandma die while also not being the kind of people to active "kill" Grandma.  I guess they feel a lack of agency regarding the pandemic and have decided that their contribution isn't worth sacrificing their immediate financial or personal fulfillment needs.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - teejers1 - 09-18-2020

(Yesterday, 02:31 PM)fullmetal Wrote:  I think the prevalence of senior homes (or assisted living) indicates how infeasible it is for modern wage-earners to care for and house their elderly relatives while also raising children and working a typical job.  Single-family housing isn't really built for it, and the increased longevity in America disproportionately increases the level of care needed for those living into older, twilight years.

So I'm not too surprised that there's a segment of the population who would "let" Grandma die while also not being the kind of people to active "kill" Grandma.  I guess they feel a lack of agency regarding the pandemic and have decided that their contribution isn't worth sacrificing their immediate financial or personal fulfillment needs.

This one is right up there with Burger's post . . . before he decided to check out of here (if memory serves).  Only instead of a direct accusation, this one's tied up in psychobabble.  Think I preferred Burger's more direct post (even though that one and this one are over the top and dripping with condescension and sanctimony).


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - fullmetal - 09-18-2020

c'mon teejers, I was hoping for a better response from you than "condescending" and "psychobabble."  but I'm sorry you took it so personally.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - M T - 09-18-2020

(09-16-2020, 05:03 PM)teejers1 Wrote:  Let's be brutally frank here.  If the death profile of the 200,000 folks who perished were 20-50 year old working and tax-paying mothers and fathers (as opposed to grandmothers/grandfathers . . . or great grandmothers/grandfathers), then the reaction would be different.  It is not - by and large those dying are old and infirm (in some manner).  Thus, we have what we have.

I believe my reaction wouldn't be much different.  Is your reaction different, or are you just saying that other people don't care as much?

Caring less about the deaths of 50+yos than 20-50yos doesn't fit with the belief system in which I believe.  I don't believe it fits with beliefs based upon the equality of persons.


RE: Almost 200K dead in the US - teejers1 - 09-18-2020

(11 hours ago)fullmetal Wrote:  c'mon teejers, I was hoping for a better response from you than "condescending" and "psychobabble."  but I'm sorry you took it so personally.

Sorry to disappoint you; but I'm not sure what other kind of reaction you'd expect (and I thought it rather restrained).

As to MT, I'm saying that the public at large's reaction (and more importantly, those setting policy) would be different if otherwise healthy 20-50 year olds were dropping like flies.  My take is probably different from yours - if I'm interpreting your "all lives are the same" statement - inasmuch as deciding policy under only "number of lives saved from early death" cannot be the only consideration in making policy.  You have to weigh that against the damage inflicted in your effort to "save the most lives" and then draw the lines based on what you think is the least overall "harm" to society.  It's a messy, complicated, imperfect process.  

As for "equality of persons," that sounds nice, but decisions are made all the time based on factors that distinguish persons.  One example that comes immediately to mind is organ transplants.  My understanding (and it may be mistaken) is that it's not a first-come, first-serve process; but rather, factors such as life expectancy with new organ come into play.  It sucks if you get passed over and that's not equal treatment.  And even in the pandemic, we're not seeing "equality of persons" when it comes to rules and regulations.  It absolutely sucks that my mom is cooped up in an assisted living facility that will not allow her to, among other things, see her own family members.  [We were only recently allowed to schedule one-person, in-facility visits].  Everybody else gets to go about their business and social outings as they see fit.  Where is the equal persons treatment there?