USA Daily deaths continue to drop

13,656 Views | 74 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by AgsMyDude
oragator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Including today, the last three days now have been higher than the same days the previous week.

We will see over the next few days whether it's a trend or an aberration.
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yesterday balanced out the July 4th drop, as expected.

New Jersey had a dump today of another ~50 fatalities going back to March.

oragator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Even with NJ and those extra 50 deaths or so, it's 100 more than last Wednesday with some time still today to add to that.
Texas had its first 100 death day today too. Easily the most to date.

But again it's only a few days, we will see how the next few go. Not good news though.
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Oh it seems NJ dropped more than just those 50. It was 137.

oragator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Interesting.
Worldometer, where I get my numbers, is only counting 64 of those in today's total, they will likely drop the rest in tonight after they close the day out.
For comparison as of now, last Wednesday showed 676 deaths, today is at 878 currently.
AgsMyDude
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Creeping up some this week. 630.75 per day for the first 4 days this week.

For comparison, we were at 513.5 through the first 4 days of last week.


Should level out if the trend continues that Tuesday is the highest reported day of the week from weekend numbers.

agforlife97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Texas deaths have been quite a bit higher last couple of days, but still very minimal compared to prior outbreak in the northeast.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yeah we are looking at our first increase in 10 weeks.

Last week Thursday - Saturday averaged 519 deaths per day and I don't see us getting very far under that at all.

Currently averaging 628 deaths per day this week.
Proposition Joe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Surely there is some unique event, mis-interpreted number, death backlog or otherwise we can blame it on?
terradactylexpress
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, I for one look forward to what the next goal post will be
Beat40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Proposition Joe said:

Surely there is some unique event, mis-interpreted number, death backlog or otherwise we can blame it on?


I mean, while it's everything combined, is't it important to know the cause? That's the very purpose of analysis in order to drive good decision making.

It's the reason the experts are saying the largest reason for spread is super spreader events - it's a pinpoint where we can make a decision and say let's avoid the potential for those super spreader events.
BowSowy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"Deaths are reported many weeks after they occur". Book it.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
terradactylexpress said:

Yes, I for one look forward to what the next goal post will be


The goal was to avoid overwhelming hospital capacity. That's where the goalpost moving started
SirLurksALot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GAC06 said:

terradactylexpress said:

Yes, I for one look forward to what the next goal post will be


The goal was to avoid overwhelming hospital capacity. That's where the goalpost moving started


Yep, if this becomes a discussion about preventing deaths then there has to be an acknowledgement that the only way to do that is to keep restrictions in place until an effective vaccine comes. Which is something that is simply not practical.
Dazed and Confused
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
agforlife97 said:

Texas deaths have been quite a bit higher last couple of days, but still very minimal compared to prior outbreak in the northeast.
Agree, the Texas death numbers are low, just need to work on that trend to keep it that way, same goes for Hospitalizations.


Proposition Joe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Beat40 said:

Proposition Joe said:

Surely there is some unique event, mis-interpreted number, death backlog or otherwise we can blame it on?


I mean, while it's everything combined, is't it important to know the cause? That's the very purpose of analysis in order to drive good decision making.

It's the reason the experts are saying the largest reason for spread is super spreader events - it's a pinpoint where we can make a decision and say let's avoid the potential for those super spreader events.

It was more in jest about how there is so much bad information everywhere that it doesn't matter what side you are on an what you believe, there's a dataset that shows you are right, and another dataset that puts it into question.
Aust Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:

Yeah we are looking at our first increase in 10 weeks.

Last week Thursday - Saturday averaged 519 deaths per day and I don't see us getting very far under that at all.

Currently averaging 628 deaths per day this week.
I don't think anyone thought, if they were being completely honest, that the Death rate wouldn't rise with the massive amount of increase in Cases. The important Goal Post to me is, did it rise at the same % rate of Cases, like NYC? I don't think that is remotely going to end up being the case. Which is great news, overall.
oragator
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah as long as the cases skew younger we aren't getting to NY levels.
The question, as it always is, is what "acceptable" losses are. The last two days have averaged around 935 deaths, over a year that's pushing 350k if that were a constant number. Now weekends are lower, no guarantee it will stay that level etc...but making the point that even slow drips add up to a pretty full bucket after a while.
SirLurksALot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oragator said:

Yeah as long as the cases skew younger we aren't getting to NY levels.
The question, as it always is, is what "acceptable" losses are. The last two days have averaged around 935 deaths, over a year that's pushing 350k if that were a constant number. Now weekends are lower, no guarantee it will stay that level etc...but making the point that even slow drips add up to a pretty full bucket after a while.



If we're continuing a lockdown strategy then no deaths are acceptable, because the impact of the lockdowns is so severe. If we open everything up and return to normal then all deaths up to the worst case scenario are absolutely acceptable. As even a high number of deaths is only of minimal impact to society given the demographics of those who are most vulnerable.
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The daily totals should be taken with a grain of salt.

The peak was earlier and higher than we knew.




DripAG08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Keegan99 said:

The daily totals should be taken with a grain of salt.

The peak was earlier and higher than we knew.





This is why no one knows WTF is going on anymore.

Every group does whatever the hell they want to push narratives that fit their liking.

So damn frustrating.
Keegan99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I agree. After tracking this stuff for a while, it seems that CDC is the best data set we have, although it necessarily lags. The states and counties are far too haphazard. You can see some very high level trends but little more than that.
BadMoonRisin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nm
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!
HotardAg07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You spin the lag in delay of deaths the other way -- we could be experiencing much higher deaths today than what we are reporting and that won't be clear for months. I have been making the case for weeks that people dismissing the case-rise due to the simultaneous decrease in daily deaths are not paying attention to the lag in th data.

We don't really know definitively if deaths are going up or down right now and can't say with any certainty either way. When cases, positive test rate, hospitalizations, ICU usage trend up, you gotta hope enough contra-mitigating factors are driving down the death rate to not eventually see a corresponding trend up in death rate. Namely, younger, healthier infected people and better treatments. I think we are seeing some of that mitigation, not sure what the net effect will be when all is said and done.

The irresponsible thing to do would to ignore the data that makes you uncomfortable and cling to the data that supports your argument. Take all of it as a whole.
Smokedraw01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Keegan99 said:

I agree. After tracking this stuff for a while, it seems that CDC is the best data set we have, although it necessarily lags. The states and counties are far too haphazard. You can see some very high level trends but little more than that.


Are the hospitals not using the same system to track this *****
jeffdjohnson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oragator said:

Yeah as long as the cases skew younger we aren't getting to NY levels.
The question, as it always is, is what "acceptable" losses are. The last two days have averaged around 935 deaths, over a year that's pushing 350k if that were a constant number. Now weekends are lower, no guarantee it will stay that level etc...but making the point that even slow drips add up to a pretty full bucket after a while.

Sometimes in life, there is no right answer. The lockdowns have severe consequences: increases in anxiety, depression, isolation, loss of income, loss of job status, rises in domestic violence, suicide, and addiction. Not to mention ancillary effects such as people putting off health screenings. These will have long term health effects. Finally, the very far term health effects show that economic prosperity is correlated with overall life expectancy. This has to be juxtaposed with the benefits of a lockdown (or other invasive measures) in order to deem it effective. In this case, COVID-19 has an IFR of less than 0.5% that is heavily stratified by age group wherein almost half of all deaths are coming from nursing homes.

At the macro-level (as callous as it may seem) you have to weigh the various options. In a country in which 3,000,000 Americans die per year from all causes, I don't believe that a lockdown is warranted even knowing that COVID-19 remains a deadly disease. Individuals need to take appropriate actions based on their personal risk factors. The rest of society should do their best to support them by maintaining social distancing and wearing a mask if possible. Unfortunately, we will not be in control of this virus until a vaccine is developed or more effective treatments are found, regardless of what we are willing to accept.
agsalaska
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aust Ag said:

PJYoung said:

Yeah we are looking at our first increase in 10 weeks.

Last week Thursday - Saturday averaged 519 deaths per day and I don't see us getting very far under that at all.

Currently averaging 628 deaths per day this week.
I don't think anyone thought, if they were being completely honest, that the Death rate wouldn't rise with the massive amount of increase in Cases. The important Goal Post to me is, did it rise at the same % rate of Cases, like NYC? I don't think that is remotely going to end up being the case. Which is great news, overall.
We will not see, or at leat are not currently close to seeing, a repeat of NYC anywhere in Texas. I have said this before that I have a friend on my street that is a US Army officer who commands a MASH type unit(thats not exactly what they call it) and was deployed to NYC from Ft Hood.

I spent July 4th with him and after a few drinks he told me some more details that were absolutely terrible. Bodies in hallways kind of terrible. It is hard to overstate just how bad it was in NYC in their darkest hours.

Anyway he got back from NY after 10 weeks and thought we were all crazy not being completely locked down. Then after a few weeks he came to realize that NY was an exception and not a rule. He is now more or less on the open **** up train.

But, and the point of my post, he is convinced that the combination of viral load, age, and pre existing conditions were a perfect storm in NYC. Now that we are better at treating, understand who is in the most danger, and are social distancing, we will not have a repeat performance. That makes more sense than anything else.
I don’t say this in a braggedocious way. But it’s true. I’ve been right about everything.

-Donald J Trump
-9/22/2025



bdgol07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
6/8. 565 hospitalized in region Q
75000 positives in Texas
1830 deaths in Texas

7/9. 2700 hospitalized in region Q
220564 positives in Texas
2813 deaths in Texas

Region Q is Austin, Colorado, Fort Bend, Harris, Matagorda, Montgomery, Walker, Waller, Wharton Counties

I only pulled this RAC numbers because that's what we track at my facility, limited sample size, but still shows numbers are sky rocketing, deaths are not, but hospitalizations are waaaay up right now
Proposition Joe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd almost feel better about it if I believed most of it was to push a narrative.

I think most of it is simply a lack of proper process and incompetence.
A. G. Pennypacker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
bdgol07 said:

6/8. 565 hospitalized in region Q
75000 positives in Texas
1830 deaths in Texas

7/9. 2700 hospitalized in region Q
220564 positives in Texas
2813 deaths in Texas

Region Q is Austin, Colorado, Fort Bend, Harris, Matagorda, Montgomery, Walker, Waller, Wharton Counties

I only pulled this RAC numbers because that's what we track at my facility, limited sample size, but still shows numbers are sky rocketing, deaths are not, but hospitalizations are waaaay up right now
Depends on what age group all those new cases are in, but we will (and are already) going to see death rates rise. Just how much nobody knows?

For those unlucky few that do succumb, what is the average time interval from symptoms to death - I would guess 3-4 weeks?
A wealthy American industrialist looking to open a silver mine in the mountains of Peru.
texaggie90
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Death rate by age group according to cdc...

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#AgeAndSex


Gizzards
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
For the last 3 days in a row, including today, Texas death counts are rising and have set a new record each day. That is something that we didn't want to see, but I think was inevitable.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gizzards said:

For the last 3 days in a row, including today, Texas death counts are rising and have set a new record each day. That is something that we didn't want to see, but I think was inevitable.


A bit of a nitpick but if you're going by worldometer today was less than yesterday so it's not a new record each day
Gizzards
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm going by what's being reported by multiple sources here in Texas. Don't know where worldometer is getting their stats.
Pumpkinhead
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gizzards said:

I'm going by what's being reported by multiple sources here in Texas. Don't know where worldometer is getting their stats.
Just a note that Worldometer lists on their site exactly where their data is being collected from, for each country and in the case of the U.S., for each State.

For example, the data for the state of Texas that Worldometer is using this data from the Texas Health & Human Services official site:

https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83
Page 2 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.