Numbers cruncher Steve Thode has a hopeful report concerning the Covid-19 data.
Over the past three days, the number of new 7-Day COVID cases for Lehigh/NorCo combined has varied between 1,574 and 1,643. We haven't seen numbers that low since early November.
Meanwhile, the state issued its latest death report. Here's how things look as of February 5:
Since the first of the year, a total of 6,261 COVID deaths have been reported. The death rate in January was the highest of any month of the pandemic. In recent days, the number of reported new deaths has begun to decline. Deaths are still heavily concentrated among the elderly as seen by this chart:
COVID has killed 332 Pennsylvanians over the age of 100. Meanwhile, COVID has killed only 416 Pennsylvanians under the age of 50. And, more Pennsylvanians between the ages of 95 and 99 have died (1,651) from COVID than the number of Pennsylvanians under the age of 60 (1,416).
8 comments:
Thanks for posting this info. I'm still suspicious of the numbers as the question of "died from or died with" will be teased out for a while. Given these numbers, however, 1,416 under 60 have died. Pennsylvania has 10,100,000 citizens under 60. That means 0.014% of our citizens under 60 have died. That's fourteen one thousandths of one percent. The state collapsed the economy for this. To paraphrase Bernie who's paraphrased Churchill, never in our history have so many sacrificed so much for so few.
Probably the "Screw it, lets roll the dice and get the family together for the holidays" bubble is finally receding.
Aaaand here comes the Super Bowl wave next week. We must be the stupidest, most selfish country on earth.
Yeah, the Superbowl spread will increase the deaths waaaaay up to fifteen thousandths of one percent.
You can lead people to math and science, but you can't keep them from staring vacantly at it while repeating talking points they heard.
7.23
"That's fourteen one thousandths of one percent. The state collapsed the economy for this."
So how many would die if nothing was done?
As Stalin said A single death is a tragedy a million deaths is a statistic.
Besides making sure Olive Garden produces a dividend is all that counts--right.
Your argument was crushed, which is why you pivoted to requiring proof of a negative. Thanks for playing. Keep ordering Amazon and screw the kids and those who've been wiped out by unscientific decisions, backed by idiots like you who reject math and science because it's hard.
@7:23AM - All very true that COVID is certainly not a death sentence for those of us under 60, but it also ignores the fact that our healthcare system does not have the capacity for the amount of people needing extensive care associated with COVID which has always been the concern.
On top of that, the ease of spread and infection - as we've all seen - is difficult to contain once out in the open, so putting limits on travel, dining, entertainment and other social gatherings, requiring mask wearing, etc., have also lent to those lower infection and death rates, so you just can't look at the #'s and deem all of the other effort and sacrifice as needless.
Now imagine the economy if we HAD NOT put in place many of these unpopular restrictions and just all went on living our lives, spreading the virus wholesale. Hospitals and the entire healthcare system would be OVERWHELMED, people would literally be dying in the streets, businesses would be without employees for weeks at a time, missing orders, deliveries, services, causing downstream effects to their customers as well as up stream effects to their creditors, which in turn would impact their businesses and customers as domino and after domino would fall... Shit would positively crater...
But yeah, wearing a mask and not being able to go out to the bar with friends every weekend sucks.
5.49
"which is why you pivoted to requiring proof of a negative."
not at all.
Original projections were 3 to 6 percent dead. Which would be higher than the current losses.
So how many have to die before you are willing to take action?
3 percent?6 percent?,20percent?
The morality of money over life has already been answered in the first post.
I wonder what is the acceptable death figure before acting on the problem?
Post a Comment