US historical deaths from CDC data

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

This is why I focused on total deaths instead of those due to pneumonia or influenza when I plotted the data.

 

   Sure, but most of what was discussed still applies. The data is not real time, as much as we would like to believe that, and death statistics will be affected by people staying home so much. In the end, I'm not sure the traditional models that we discussed previously will actually work well for the mortality estimates for this year, since many of the assumptions have changed (in the short term).

[Dashinka 25,490]

6 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Sure, but most of what was discussed still applies. The data is not real time, as much as we would like to believe that, and death statistics will be affected by people staying home so much. In the end, I'm not sure the traditional models that we discussed previously will actually work well for the mortality estimates for this year, since many of the assumptions have changed (in the short term).

Possibly, there is really no way of knowing.  It is sort of the 55 mph speed limit debate from years ago.  So were fewer traffic fatalities due to the fact the speed limit was lowered, or due to other factors such as safer vehicles, seat belt usage, etc.  All factors play a role, and in this current situation there are more factors than just stay at home orders.  Again, it is all a balancing act where we do not want the cure to be worse than the disease, and it seems like it is starting to head that way.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Dashinka

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

It doesn't matter what criteria you apply to the data, the data cited there is accurate. It's not misleading. It's not false. It's not a news article.

 

Remind us again what you're sitting here screeching and flooding the thread about the TOS for?

Edited April 15, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

7 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Possibly, there is really no way of knowing.  It is sort of the 55 mph speed limit debate from years ago.  So were fewer traffic fatalities due to the fact the speed limit was lowered, or due to other factors such as safer vehicles, seat belt usage, etc.  All factors play a role, and in this current situation there are more factors than just stay at home orders.  Again, it is all a balancing act where we do not want the cure to be worse than the disease, and it seems like it is starting to head that way.

That's precisely right. This is useful data to see over time, because a death is a death is a death, one of the several things that interests me is changes in attribution. Would've been a nice point of discussion in the thread, if it weren't hijacked and turned into a romper room tantrum session. Jeezus.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

9 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Sure, but most of what was discussed still applies. The data is not real time, as much as we would like to believe that, and death statistics will be affected by people staying home so much. In the end, I'm not sure the traditional models that we discussed previously will actually work well for the mortality estimates for this year, since many of the assumptions have changed (in the short term).

If you have access to real time data that is more up to date than what the CDC publishes, by all means publish it, and I will use it next time.  
 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Voice of Reason said:

If you have access to real time data that is more up to date than what the CDC publishes, by all means publish it, and I will use it next time.  
 

 

 

   There is no real time data. There is most up to date. Looked like it was increasing at week 10, which is in line with what the CDC says. Note this is directly from the CDC and is the latest data they have released. The next update should be tomorrow.

 

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S2

 

 

      

 

 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

6 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   There is no real time data. There is most up to date. Looked like it was increasing at week 10, which is in line with what the CDC says. Note this is directly from the CDC and is the latest data they have released. The next update should be tomorrow.

 

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S2

 

 

      

 

 

So you're all good with the chart I posted?  

Edited April 16, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[Steeleballz 7,550]

9 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

So you're all good with the chart I posted?  

 

   The main thing is you're good with it. I'm curious why it's labelled "flu and pneumonia mortality" but uses total deaths instead of flu related deaths. I'll continue to use the CDC's one. I guess I'll see in a few weeks how it looked through the end of March, and how closely it compares with your unofficial chart.

[90DayFinancier 910]

35 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

If you have access to real time data that is more up to date than what the CDC publishes, by all means publish it, and I will use it next time.  
 

 

If one were to examine the notes on the CDC site, the caveats and explanation of the data would be clear. 

 

 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

9 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   The main thing is you're good with it. I'm curious why it's labelled "flu and pneumonia mortality" but uses total deaths instead of flu related deaths. I'll continue to use the CDC's one. I guess I'll see in a few weeks how it looked through the end of March, and how closely it compares with your unofficial chart.

  You crack me up dude.  Unofficial... SMH

 

 

 

Just now, 90DayFinancier said:

If one were to examine the notes on the CDC site, the caveats and explanation of the data would be clear. 

 

 

Yes, it is very clear, and has been for years.  That's why I use it.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Voice of Reason

[90DayFinancier 910]

8 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

  You crack me up dude.  Unofficial... SMH

 

 

 

Yes, it is very clear, and has been for years.  That's why I use it.

You have been quoting CDC data for years?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

44 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

  You crack me up dude.  Unofficial... SMH

 

 

  The chart does not come from the CDC, and you know it doesn't. If it did you would have posted the link. We both know where you found it.

[TBoneTX 47,016]

No derisiveness or baiting by anyone, please.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 hour ago, Voice of Reason said:

If you have access to real time data that is more up to date than what the CDC publishes, by all means publish it, and I will use it next time.  
 

 

More than that, while the "historical death" data does change (and presumably in one direction, as they are a deadly music group I hear), it doesn't change enough to, in any way of substance, modify a conclusion based on what's unequivocally a massive fall. And it's absolutely essential when factoring what can be subjective attribution to understand real time data, as blindly allowing others to modify data and simply trusting their interpretations (along with misdirection) allows for the sort of narrative driving seen throughout the media, and in discourse. The comedy industry of modeling (which is as scientific as being magicians) comes to mind, where people randomly play with numbers just because. It's in everything now, sports, sports betting, endless CRM data, the sciences (naturally), and of course script/programming based data.. (R, PowerBI/other BI tools, fittingly, one of my favorites is a forecasting package in R called "prophet"), but never in functional life, where we realize what analysis paralysis is. The big catch for this exercise of futility of modeling impossibly complex systems is its one and only success -- having the image of a prophet (along with attention, power, money, validation, influence that results), even though it was of no real world use or consequence, beyond teaching people a distinct angle of human irrationality.

Edited April 16, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Dashinka 25,490]

4 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   The main thing is you're good with it. I'm curious why it's labelled "flu and pneumonia mortality" but uses total deaths instead of flu related deaths. I'll continue to use the CDC's one. I guess I'll see in a few weeks how it looked through the end of March, and how closely it compares with your unofficial chart.

 I suspect the CDC does not plot the weekly total death rate is because it rarely changes from year-to-year.  Even the spike in percent of deaths due to P&I in late 2017 did almost nothing to the weekly overall death rate except for a slight uptick in early 2018.  The simple fact is 50k to 70k people die in the US each week except for the trend now in 2020.  If we assume this drop in 2020 is due to social distancing orders and implosion of the economy, then why not do this all the time?