57 COVID deaths in GA today: Post-opening spike starting?

zxczxcv wrote:7 out of the top 10 states in new cases today so far are in the South or Southwest: Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Arizona.

At the risk of offending the fragile sensibilities of someone who complained previously about me examining the political dimension of this crisis in the US, here are graphs of daily new cases for US states aggregated based on 2016 presidential vote, where purple "swing" states in my graphs are where the vote was within +/- 5%:

Daily cases are creeping up in red and purple states, and declining rapidly in blue states (which are dominated by NY and NJ). Fatalities have increased recently in purple states, are declining very slowly in red states and declining fairly rapidly in blue states.

On the whole, the US is in decline, but it is not evenly distributed, and some states are seeing the effects of opening too soon or too aggressively.

The world is a whole other story. Cases and fatalities are growing sharply:

This is dominated mainly by growth in central and South America, with lesser but important growth in eastern Mediterranean, southeast Asia and Africa, declining growth in North America and Europe, and stable (under control) conditions in western Pacific regions:

This is going to be a long, painful year globally, and I suspect the outbreak will drag out through the summer and into the fall across USA as many states continue to grow new cases.

6/9 data

More of the same.

Looking at the 7 day rolling average of daily deaths.

The world continues to see more and more deaths but the US keeps improving.

Not much more to say than that.

The speed of the US improvement continues. On June 2 the 7 day average was 1,050 deaths per day. On June 9 the average was 835.

In the US we're still seeing a rise in case loads in many southern states...but it's not translating into increased deaths. Maybe that mysterious loss of potency the Italians have seen in their virus is also here. Or maybe it's just too early.

In GA ...the death counts continue to fall sharply, but the case counts have been in a roller coaster range since late April, and maybe even ticking up a bit the last few days.

great stuff, interested reader.

agip wrote:In the US we're still seeing a rise in case loads in many southern states...but it's not translating into increased deaths. Maybe that mysterious loss of potency the Italians have seen in their virus is also here. Or maybe it's just too early.

My own belief is that it's mainly a result of somewhat more complete testing, so that the total reported cases is closer to the actual number of cases, and actual new cases are probably declining in most (but not all) states.

if someone has ever ridden in a car and then dies, their death is recorded as a car related or car linked death.

Go back outside and play GC, adults are talking.

interested reader wrote:

Go back outside and play GC, adults are talking.

You know what they say.

If you are taking a lot of flack, it means you are right over the target.

Giles Corey wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

We're still waiting Giles.

Who is behind the scamdemic?

What do they have to gain?

You are unaware of the $5 trillion given to the richest people in America?

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-multi-trillion-dollar-stimulus-package/#:~:text=%245%20Trillion%20%E2%80%93%20Fed's%202020%20Bailouts%20to%20Eclipse%202008's%20Stimulus&text=Megabanks%20and%20Corporate%20America%20wants,cost%20upwards%20of%20%245%20trillion

.

You guys really need to expand your sources outside of the mainstream media

So your answer is to post some links.

Why are you unable to answer in your own words?

Answer for us. If you want to use quotes and primary sources to back up your claims than that's fine. But if you can't answer these questions yourself then you don't know what you are talking about.

Who is behind the scamdemic?

What do they have to gain?

interested reader wrote:

agip wrote:In the US we're still seeing a rise in case loads in many southern states...but it's not translating into increased deaths. Maybe that mysterious loss of potency the Italians have seen in their virus is also here. Or maybe it's just too early.

My own belief is that it's mainly a result of somewhat more complete testing, so that the total reported cases is closer to the actual number of cases, and actual new cases are probably declining in most (but not all) states.

I hope you are right.

Hey could you post those graphs in the big Trump thread?

The ones that have a political angle. I think people there would be interested to see them.

Any time you have something with a political side it would be great if you posted them there too.

agip wrote:Hey could you post those graphs in the big Trump thread?

The ones that have a political angle. I think people there would be interested to see them.

Any time you have something with a political side it would be great if you posted them there too.

I am not inclined to wade into that toxic soup... sorry

Fat hurts wrote:

Giles Corey wrote:

We're still waiting Giles.

Who is behind the scamdemic?

What do they have to gain?

You are unaware of the $5 trillion given to the richest people in America?

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-multi-trillion-dollar-stimulus-package/#:~:text=%245%20Trillion%20%E2%80%93%20Fed's%202020%20Bailouts%20to%20Eclipse%202008's%20Stimulus&text=Megabanks%20and%20Corporate%20America%20wants,cost%20upwards%20of%20%245%20trillion

.

You guys really need to expand your sources outside of the mainstream media

So your answer is to post some links.

Yes.

A link showing who has benefited from the COVID19.

You know, the question I was asked.

Had I answered without providing a source, I strongly suspect you would be attacking me for not giving documentation.

I answer you with documentation, and you whine need to put it into my own words.

You Covid19 accepters of the official narrative are a sad bunch

interested reader wrote:

agip wrote:Hey could you post those graphs in the big Trump thread?

The ones that have a political angle. I think people there would be interested to see them.

Any time you have something with a political side it would be great if you posted them there too.

I am not inclined to wade into that toxic soup... sorry

Harsh but fair

interested reader wrote:

zxczxcv wrote:7 out of the top 10 states in new cases today so far are in the South or Southwest: Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Arizona.

At the risk of offending the fragile sensibilities of someone who complained previously about me examining the political dimension of this crisis in the US, here are graphs of daily new cases for US states aggregated based on 2016 presidential vote, where purple "swing" states in my graphs are where the vote was within +/- 5%:

https://ibb.co/hC3G9Fh

. . .

Keeping in mind that political orientation is highly correlated with population density as is infection transmission I'm wondering if primary cause of the difference in case density trend isn't primarily a result of population density rather than political orientation.

agip wrote:

great stuff, interested reader.

Could you two get a room? :)

I'm a data guy too, so, even if I disagree with conclusions provided by it (or inputs), it's good to see others using it. I think understanding data is sorely lacking from our society at large, which leads to decisions based on emotions, which are often counterproductive or wrong.

Monkeys typing wrote:Keeping in mind that political orientation is highly correlated with population density as is infection transmission I'm wondering if primary cause of the difference in case density trend isn't primarily a result of population density rather than political orientation.

You'll note I've not made any comment about causation, just presented the data.

A lot of the analysis I've done has led to bizarre findings. Cases and fatalities (total and per capita) correlate strongly with GDP, with richer countries being worse off. Clearly wealth does not cause sickness, so the causative path is through some hidden confounding factor(s). Similarly, the outcomes we see in red, blue and purple states may have absolutely nothing to do with political leanings. It may be a result of urban population (which correlates strongly with the outbreak; population density on its own has almost zero correlation), or it may have to do with age demographics (older populations have more fatalities).

Giles Corey wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

You are unaware of the $5 trillion given to the richest people in America?

https://news.bitcoin.com/the-multi-trillion-dollar-stimulus-package/#:~:text=%245%20Trillion%20%E2%80%93%20Fed's%202020%20Bailouts%20to%20Eclipse%202008's%20Stimulus&text=Megabanks%20and%20Corporate%20America%20wants,cost%20upwards%20of%20%245%20trillion

.

You guys really need to expand your sources outside of the mainstream media

So your answer is to post some links.

Yes.

A link showing who has benefited from the COVID19.

You know, the question I was asked.

Had I answered without providing a source, I strongly suspect you would be attacking me for not giving documentation.

I answer you with documentation, and you whine need to put it into my own words.

You Covid19 accepters of the official narrative are a sad bunch

You did not answer the question at all. Obviously, some benefit from COVID-19. Manufacturers of N95 masks is a good example. But that wasn't the question.

The question I asked was:

Who is behind the scamdemic?

and

What do they have to gain?

"they" being the people behind the scamdemic.

You have never named who is actually running the show and what they have to gain by somehow getting the medical establishment to go along and scare us all into staying home.

Again, if you can't put it into your own words then you don't know what you are talking about.

Monkeys typing wrote:

interested reader wrote:

At the risk of offending the fragile sensibilities of someone who complained previously about me examining the political dimension of this crisis in the US, here are graphs of daily new cases for US states aggregated based on 2016 presidential vote, where purple "swing" states in my graphs are where the vote was within +/- 5%:

https://ibb.co/hC3G9Fh

. . .

Keeping in mind that political orientation is highly correlated with population density as is infection transmission I'm wondering if primary cause of the difference in case density trend isn't primarily a result of population density rather than political orientation.

There is also a certain amount of luck involved. Who goes where and wanders into which big crowds has an effect on the size, location, and timing of an outbreak.

interested reader wrote:

agip wrote:Hey could you post those graphs in the big Trump thread?

The ones that have a political angle. I think people there would be interested to see them.

Any time you have something with a political side it would be great if you posted them there too.

I am not inclined to wade into that toxic soup... sorry

Good call!

Fat hurts wrote:There is also a certain amount of luck involved. Who goes where and wanders into which big crowds has an effect on the size, location, and timing of an outbreak.

I agree 100%. There is a lot of variability that has to be purely random, and a lot of occurrences that were just a matter of bad luck.