Jump to content

With election looming, U.S. faces record surge of coronavirus cases


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Here's an update on the U.S.:

 

Quote

Coronavirus in the U.S.: Where cases are growing and declining

The United States crossed nine million coronavirus cases on October 30, but this grim milestone is less concerning than the pace at which it has been reached: The nation recorded a million cases in a mere 14 days, between October 16 and 30. Cases haven’t escalated at that pace since late July, when the pandemic spiked across the South and Southwest.

Now, the spikes are everywhere. Cases rates are high and rising in 40 states and territories. As of late October, at least three of every four ICU beds are occupied in 21 states. Hospitals are overrun, especially in the Midwest.

 

Updated Nov. 1, 2020, 6:30 A.M. E.T

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/05/graphic-tracking-coronavirus-infections-us/

 

Cases rates are high and rising in 40 states and territories.

 

At the current pace, America could reach 300,000 deaths before the new year.

Screenshot_3.jpg.acd1cf41d21d1c50d7f7bdf71bc76bf8.jpg

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Here's a good look at what's gone on with the rising CV deaths trend in the U.S. during October:

 

The prior 7-day tally of CV deaths has risen from about 5000 at the beginning of October to more than 5700 for the prior 7 days by the end of the month, with the marked rise beginning about the middle of the month, as shown below.

 

(Note: each dot on the chart below represents that day's tally of CV deaths based on the total of the prior week.)

 

1001959739_USCVDeathsOct20207dayavg.jpg.ff9052bafad1dcbf46c1c0ec839203c3.jpg

 

1319145155_Deaths1.jpg.005b646d39b28720ecea858443ac3169.jpg

 

627785800_Deaths2.jpg.373a0d34d1fb451a5cdcef01b5882a92.jpg

Posted (edited)
Quote

Coronavirus surging in every key swing state as voters head to polls

With Election Day just hours away, coronavirus cases are rising in every key political battleground state around the country, according to an ABC News analysis, a striking reality that highlights the inextricable link between the pandemic and the 2020 race for president, despite Donald Trump's best efforts to refocus the conversation elsewhere.

 

Deaths and hospitalizations are rising as well.

 

The outbreak is hitting in record numbers nationwide -- but the virus is spreading faster in case per population in many hotly contested states, including Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Wisconsin and Texas, according to the analysis of data from Johns Hopkins University.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
  • Thanks 1
Posted
54 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Here's a good look at what's gone on with the rising CV deaths trend in the U.S. during October:

 

The prior 7-day tally of CV deaths has risen from about 5000 at the beginning of October to more than 5700 for the prior 7 days by the end of the month, with the marked rise beginning about the middle of the month, as shown below.

 

(Note: each dot on the chart below represents that day's tally of CV deaths based on the total of the prior week.)

 

1001959739_USCVDeathsOct20207dayavg.jpg.ff9052bafad1dcbf46c1c0ec839203c3.jpg

 

1319145155_Deaths1.jpg.005b646d39b28720ecea858443ac3169.jpg

 

627785800_Deaths2.jpg.373a0d34d1fb451a5cdcef01b5882a92.jpg

 

The following 2 graphs help broaden the overall view.

 

 1. Weekly US deaths (your chart) starting Aug 7 + EU countries for reference.

 2.  Same data per capita showing how well everyone is doing.

 

Rises in October are likely related the start of cold season. The EU in particular is having a bad time  in part from a new version of the virus, 20A.EU1, from Spain.  The US August peak represents a 2nd US wave that Europe didn't have. (summer holiday?) October represents the start of a 3rd wave for the US and 2nd wave for EO. 

 

The number of deaths in the current wave is oddly low relative to total cases. I think this is in part because the recent wave starts with younger people.

graph1.png.e6bc38c03564aacece134908595c4819.png

 

graph2.png.8519534c4f677c6f4653309acc4bc2a6.png

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 11/1/2020 at 6:23 PM, scammed said:

i still havnt come across a shred of data that the much vaunted 2nd wave is going to be ohh soo much worse,,

as is the trending narrative, the cases are up, but the death toll has roughly flatlined. i know a couple of US states that are on increase, but i see no difference in them two with one having lockdown & mask and the other neither,

fluke or unknown data play a part in this

 

May I suggest looking a little deeper into the numbers. Most worrisome is the degree of increase in cases, because when and where cases go up, so do deaths, but there is a time lag of 2-4 weeks.
There has been a benefit of knowledge gained in how to treat the patients more effectively, but we still do not have a vaccine, are not begun having vaccinated the population, and even among those who recover, nearly 30% have low energy for months and many have permanent organ damage.

875570193_NewCases201102.png.44bd9ee5c01876765abcb3729cf201de.png

Posted
15 minutes ago, RPCVguy said:

 

May I suggest looking a little deeper into the numbers. Most worrisome is the degree of increase in cases, because when and where cases go up, so do deaths, but there is a time lag of 2-4 weeks.
There has been a benefit of knowledge gained in how to treat the patients more effectively, but we still do not have a vaccine, are not begun having vaccinated the population, and even among those who recover, nearly 30% have low energy for months and many have permanent organ damage.

875570193_NewCases201102.png.44bd9ee5c01876765abcb3729cf201de.png

 

4 minutes ago, scammed said:

if your hypothesis was worth squat,

it would be a correlation there for all to see every_time

Screenshot (55).jpg

image.png.e35a44a7ce58b05845b04ace5d14f67a.jpg

This shows a lack of the ability to read a graph. The ones I posted are PER 100,000 PEOPLE IN THE STATE. My larger graph cover all states for the past 12 weeks - showing cases are rising per capita in the GOP states, and then inserted it shows the deaths per capita, again rising most in the GOP states. It is labeled correctly, but you've neglected to read the labels.

Then, while the discussion is focused on the USA elections, you are returning to mixing Sweden into the conversation even as you post an unlabeled death chart at the top. The culture and behavior to consider community needs among Swedes is not what exists in the USA. At the rate of deaths per case in the USA the total deaths for the USA would rise into the millions.

  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, RPCVguy said:

 

This shows a lack of the ability to read a graph. The ones I posted are PER 100,000 PEOPLE IN THE STATE. My larger graph cover all states for the past 12 weeks - showing cases are rising per capita in the GOP states, and then inserted it shows the deaths per capita, again rising most in the GOP states. It is labeled correctly, but you've neglected to read the labels.

Then, while the discussion is focused on the USA elections, you are returning to mixing Sweden into the conversation even as you post an unlabeled death chart at the top. The culture and behavior to consider community needs among Swedes is not what exists in the USA. At the rate of deaths per case in the USA the total deaths for the USA would rise into the millions.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

same in USA, no correlation between cases and deaths

 

usa daily new cases.jpg

US daily deaths.jpg

  • Sad 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, scammed said:

if your hypothesis was worth squat,

it would be a correlation there for all to see every_time

Screenshot (55).jpg

image.png.e35a44a7ce58b05845b04ace5d14f67a.jpg

 

Jeez.  Give it up.  And find a better source for your graphs.  We've seen that one dozens of times from you.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Jeffr2 said:

 

Jeez.  Give it up.  And find a better source for your graphs.  We've seen that one dozens of times from you.

you mean take media gospel as source ?

  • Sad 1
Posted
Just now, scammed said:

you mean take media gospel as source ?

Your point of view has been made. Some will accept it and agree with you, some will not.

Accept it and move on. 

  • Like 1
Posted
37 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No, accept scientific conclusion as conveyed by the media as the best possible source.

the raw data is available to me, admit i havnt checked

https://www.worldometers.info & https://www.statista.com

data is valid, but i also havnt got that interest to dig if their data is accurate,

and i dont expect media could even be arsed to check data,

they are happy to sell sensationalist buzz words, end of..

there is no scientific consensus, and even if there were,

that is also nonsense, as demonstrated by the 100 scientists agreed Einstein was wrong

  • Sad 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, scammed said:

the raw data is available to me, admit i havnt checked

https://www.worldometers.info & https://www.statista.com

data is valid, but i also havnt got that interest to dig if their data is accurate,

and i dont expect media could even be arsed to check data,

they are happy to sell sensationalist buzz words, end of..

there is no scientific consensus, and even if there were,

that is also nonsense, as demonstrated by the 100 scientists agreed Einstein was wrong

When something new in science, like Relativity comes along, it does take a while to be universally accepted. Like epidemiology in the 19th century. But both are universally accepted now. At least by those scientists and non-scientists who also accept that the year is 2020.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, scammed said:

the raw data is available to me, admit i havnt checked

https://www.worldometers.info & https://www.statista.com

data is valid, but i also havnt got that interest to dig if their data is accurate,

and i dont expect media could even be arsed to check data,

they are happy to sell sensationalist buzz words, end of..

there is no scientific consensus, and even if there were,

that is also nonsense, as demonstrated by the 100 scientists agreed Einstein was wrong

Great defense.

 

The old...i did not have sex with her, but if i did it was consensual, defense.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

When something new in science, like Relativity comes along, it does take a while to be universally accepted. Like epidemiology in the 19th century. But both are universally accepted now. At least by those scientists and non-scientists who also accept that the year is 2020.

if data supported the hypotheses that there is a correlation between cases/masks/deaths, then every chart would

show it, but they dont, that sums up my conclusion and point of view

Edited by scammed
  • Sad 2
Posted
19 minutes ago, scammed said:

if data supported the hypotheses that there is a correlation between cases/masks/deaths, then every chart would

show it, but they dont, that sums up my conclusion and point of view

oh thank goodness, now move on

 

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You have to understand what the graphs are measuring and what they are not measuring. But it's ridiculous that you, a non-scientist, think your unsophisticated opinion actually counts for something in a highly technical field like this. Clearly it's just your political opinions leading you to a conclusion that pleases you.

i am data analyst by education and value my analysis higher then media hype

Edited by scammed
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
28 minutes ago, scammed said:

if data supported the hypotheses that there is a correlation between cases/masks/deaths, then every chart would

show it, but they dont, that sums up my conclusion and point of view

But the data doesn't support the hypotheses.  You're misrepresenting things entirely.  Thus, trolling.

  • Like 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

But the data doesn't support the hypotheses.  You're misrepresenting things entirely.  Thus, trolling.

what hypothesis ?

Posted
3 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

But the data doesn't support the hypotheses.  You're misrepresenting things entirely.  Thus, trolling.

Well actually the data does exist. Compare 4 countries all with similar geography/societies, preferably adjacent to each other and identical climates. Three go down the mask route one doesnt then compare their cases/ deaths. Some interesting conclusions.

 

Sweden:   Cumulative Covid cases 96K      Cumulative Covid deaths 5.9k (No masks.)

 

Norway:   Cumulative Covid cases  13k     Cumulative Covid deaths 267 (Masks.)

 

Denmark: Cumulative Covid cases  30k     Cumulative Covid deaths 643 (Masks.)

 

Finland:   Cumulative Covid cases   10k    Cumulative Covid deaths 346 (Masks.)

 

Analyse that data @scammed

  • Like 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, polpott said:

Well actually the data does exist. Compare 4 countries all with similar geography/societies, preferably adjacent to each other and identical climates. Three go down the mask route one doesnt then compare their cases/ deaths. Some interesting conclusions.

 

Sweden:   Cumulative Covid cases 96K      Cumulative Covid deaths 5.9k (No masks.)

 

Norway:   Cumulative Covid cases  13k     Cumulative Covid deaths 267 (Masks.)

 

Denmark: Cumulative Covid cases  30k     Cumulative Covid deaths 643 (Masks.)

 

Finland:   Cumulative Covid cases   10k    Cumulative Covid deaths 346 (Masks.)

 

Analyse that data @scammed

@Thomas J, as we were discussing in another thread.

Posted
1 hour ago, polpott said:

Well actually the data does exist. Compare 4 countries all with similar geography/societies, preferably adjacent to each other and identical climates. Three go down the mask route one doesnt then compare their cases/ deaths. Some interesting conclusions.

 

Sweden:   Cumulative Covid cases 96K      Cumulative Covid deaths 5.9k (No masks.)

 

Norway:   Cumulative Covid cases  13k     Cumulative Covid deaths 267 (Masks.)

 

Denmark: Cumulative Covid cases  30k     Cumulative Covid deaths 643 (Masks.)

 

Finland:   Cumulative Covid cases   10k    Cumulative Covid deaths 346 (Masks.)

 

Analyse that data @scammed

@scammed
doesn't like the truth

Posted
1 hour ago, polpott said:

Well actually the data does exist. Compare 4 countries all with similar geography/societies, preferably adjacent to each other and identical climates. Three go down the mask route one doesnt then compare their cases/ deaths. Some interesting conclusions.

 

Sweden:   Cumulative Covid cases 96K      Cumulative Covid deaths 5.9k (No masks.)

 

Norway:   Cumulative Covid cases  13k     Cumulative Covid deaths 267 (Masks.)

 

Denmark: Cumulative Covid cases  30k     Cumulative Covid deaths 643 (Masks.)

 

Finland:   Cumulative Covid cases   10k    Cumulative Covid deaths 346 (Masks.)

 

Analyse that data @scammed

He can't analyze it. He admitted he's already made up his mind.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...