Unfortunately, these numbers are incorrect. It is not on track to be lower than either 2018 or 2019. Perhaps Sarah meant 2018 and 2019 combined, which if so, it would easily be lower. If you take the higher of the two years, 2019, at 2855000 and you subtract 1/3 of that number from it, you get 1903334, well under the current count for 2020. Also, that is not counting the last 6 days of September, and October through December are increased influenza months which should make the death toll higher. Am I missing something?
Ask Sarah. I didn’t see any source printed for her numbers.
To clarify, there were links in the twitter post, but I did not look at them.
Why subtract 1/3 when 3/4 of the year ends in September? I would think 75% of the year would be more accurate, and without knowing what spikes there were in the 4th quarter, then i do not know how we can arrive at an actual number yet.
That being said, there has been an increase each year. In government math, a reduction is real when the rate of growth is reduced, not the actual numbers. At least, that is how they figure a cut in spending.
Sept 24 is day 267. Does that help?
why 1/3 ?
I’m gonna have to agree with Sarah on this one. Let’s do the easy maff first:
2018 = 2839205 deaths / 365 days = 7779 deaths/day
2019 = 2855000 deaths / 365 days = 7821 deaths/day
Sept 24 2000 = 268 days
2033736 deaths / 268 days = 7589 deaths/day
What should be expected? Comparing 2018 to 2019 total deaths there is a 0.6% increase year over year.
Using 2019 deaths at 2855000 an increase of 0.6% should yield:
2855000 * .006 = 2872130 deaths for 2020.
2872130 deaths / 366 days = 7847 deaths/day expected for 2020.
7847 - 7589 = 258 deaths/day shortfall. To meet the 0.6% expected increase in deaths I’d say it’s fair that 2020 will be fairly close to matching 2019 if you consider a slightly higher death rate in Oct - Dec.
I believe that should be 0.264 for the amount of the remaining year, which does put it under.