[DoodleBob]

I'm not saying BI is trolling FR, and certainly per capita analysis is nothing new...but an analysis that shows Confirmed Cases standardized by size was posted to FR on four days ago. Here is my latest update to the Confirmed Case Counts, adjusted/standardized for country population:

Country/Region	Population (MM)	Confirmed Cases 3/25/2020	Standardized Cases 3/25/2020	Rank by Confirmed Cases Mar 25	Rank by Standardized Cases Mar 25
Austria	9.0	5,588	205,337	14	6
Belgium	11.5	4,937	140,788	15	10
California	39.5	2,998	24,968	18	22
China	1433.8	82,803	19,004	1	23
Denmark	5.8	1,724	98,288	21	13
Florida	21.5	1,682	25,770	22	21
France	65.1	25,233	127,489	10	11
Germany	83.5	37,323	147,056	6	9
Hubei	58.5	67,801	381,383	3	4
Iran	82.9	27,017	107,224	9	12
Italy	60.6	74,386	404,258	2	3
Korea, South	51.2	9,137	58,695	13	17
Massachusetts	6.9	1,838	87,031	20	14
New Jersey	8.9	4,402	163,084	16	8
New York	19.5	30,841	521,688	8	1
Norway	5.4	3,084	188,671	17	7
Pennsylvania	12.8	1,260	32,387	23	20
Spain	46.7	49,515	348,626	5	5
Sweden	10.0	2,526	82,821	19	15
Switzerland	8.6	10,897	417,375	11	2
Texas	29.0	1,229	13,948	24	24
United Kingdom	67.5	9,529	46,433	12	18
US	329.1	65,778	65,778	4	16
US excl NY	309.6	34,937	37,132	7	19

Despite the sequential double-digit growth rate in US Confirmed Cases, the relative ranking of the US' standardized case count remains relatively low. The US was at 16th on this list when you adjust for the population, vs 4th in absolute terms. Further, if you remove New York (which is accounting makes up about 6% of the total population but 47% of the total US case count), the US is the 19th lowest out of these 24 select countries/states. Indeed, NY State is now the size-adjusted case count leader in this selection of countries/regions/states.

[GnuThere]

What’s the deal with Switzerland, is it entirely explained by their border with Italy?

[GMMC0987]

Nice theory, but it assumes you can trust the reported numbers from all countries. We know China isn’t being honest and learned that Italy reported all deaths “with” the virus as being caused by the virus.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Good God, Washington State should be included, much less “US excluding NY”. Well, maybe NY by sheer number, but WA I exclude to analyze any “death rate” because they are at some 5%, completely throwing off the rate for USA.

[BradyLS]

China’s numbers should have a big, ol’ asterisk!

[Steven Scharf]

You realize it took an intern about 5 minutes to pull this from WorldMeter website including the cases per million. They are crediting Johns Hopkins, but the font is the same that Worldmeter uses.

[thoughtomator]

I don’t believe the German numbers much more than I believe the Chinese ones. Something really off about Germany reporting, their results are so much different.

Other than that, this is a chart of how much testing per capita has been done, basically.

[GOPJ]

How many of Florida’s cases are clustered within 50 miles of MacDill’s Central Command?

[AnotherUnixGeek]

The US, China, and Italy (in that order) have the highest number of coronavirus cases in the world.

This is laughable because it assumes the Chinese are telling the truth. Reality is that China almost certainly has far more cases than the US and Italy put together.

[InterceptPoint]

You are correct about New York. But drill down to NYC and the numbers really get bad. Right now I am showing:

NYC 2678 cases per million.

That is really high.

[Paladin2]

Triple bunker beds.

How kool is that?

[indthkr]

per capita analysis - bump for later.....

[ifinnegan]

San Marino.

[mrsmith]

Hey, I was first on FR!
‘You hurt my feelings.

[mrsmith]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3828581/posts?page=637#637
Look a couple replies up...

Anyway, the daily covid thread is a GREAT source!

[McGruff]

Even the total cases numbers are misleading.

“So far, New York has clocked 37,258 confirmed cases and 385 deaths from COVID-19”

What is that like 0.1%?

[ltc8k6]

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Worldometer shows ~82K active US cases, but only ~2,100 are serious or critical.

[Future Useless Eater]

Thanks DB, You did a good job of pointing out that our danger is not as bad as other countries yet, due to differing populations .

I had that thought a few days ago too, and also tossed around numbers vs population in a spreadsheet but never published it. I used it to try to calm down my freaking out wife.

There’s another covid19 monitoring site which has something similar, which they call “cases per 1M people”.
( https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ )
But I don’t care for that measure quite as much because some simpletons (like my wife) can’t envision what that means in terms of risk.
So for my own stats, I turned my results into “Ratio of Healthy to Contagious”. She understood that perfectly.
At the time, I said for example: “In MN, you’d have to shake hands with 25,000 people before you probably shook the hand of one person that was contagious. But in NY, if you shook hands with 900 people you’d probably have shaken one contagious person’s hand.”

In terms of China, they have a HUGE percentage of CURED patients, so it made more sense to use population divided by “active cases”. I used that for a while.

But then I realized that also has a flaw: MANY counties and countries are NOT bothering counting or reporting correct numbers for RECOVERED cases, so the count of “active cases” is too high as reported.

I am convinced that is because there is a LOT of testing going on, where someone is tested POSITIVE for the virus, and gets counted as a covid19 “case”, but gets sent home to self-quarantine and only reports back if they need hospital assistance before the virus clears itself. That person never gets tested again, and never gets counted as “recovered”.

For the moment, I am bummed out about using (population/total cases), OR (population/active cases) because differing countries and states and counties do more or less testing than others.

For now, I’m most in favor of estimating the relative risk for different areas by just using the (population / (”serious cases” times 50)) That’s because some of the experts are saying only 2% of [(diagnosed & undiagnosed) cases] become so serious they require hospitalization. It shouldn’t matter if you’d rather use a multiplication factor of 25 or 50 or 100 to determine “estimated active cases” as long as you are consistent.

This method of comparison will soon not work so well if doctors all over the country/world start using differing “cures”.

[Future Useless Eater]

There is something very ODD that jumped out at me while studying today’s data.

You can see what I mean by pulling up this page...
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
...then scrolling down to the chart, and clicking twice on
“Active Cases” which will show USA is first, then Italy, Then Spain, then GERMANY.

Note that Germany has half our “active cases” but only one hundredth of our “serious cases”!!!

I wonder why that could be? Their percentage of active cases that are “serious” is way too small compared to other regions. Are they perhaps using a “cure” there which they have not announced?

[Ken Regis]

I’ve been saying for weeks that a per capita report would reveal far more than a simple “# of cases” report.

Thanks!

[norwaypinesavage]

It’s interesting to note that some “news” organizations are actually declaring “Trump Lied” when he declared that the US had conducted more testing than any other countries, because he didn’t use the per-capita test numbers. Some of them are now saying that the actual death count must be used, NOT the per-capita numbers.