#covid19 in #southcentralpa *NUMBERS* as of: Wed 27-May-2020

As a service to the local 10-county region, these charts are updated daily around 5-6pm Eastern).

Neighbors/Readers: Today commences the new release schedule of between 5-6pm to allow time for the State's later release of data. That said, as of this writing at 5pm - the state has not released their Nursing Hom data, so I'm unable to update the nursing home v general population charts. Sorry, nothing I can do without the data.

NOTE: The promised article that I mentioned yesterday, is available here as PDF or here on Linkedin where you can comment on it if you choose to.

These are the "FACTS" as reported by the State DOH.

  • 17-May, they reported 261 Nursing Home (NH) deaths and 69 deaths in the General Public (GP) = 330 total.
  • 18-May, they reported 266 NH and 150 GP = 416 total. A sudden rise of 86 deaths out of nowhere (81 in the general public) with no commensurate spike in infections going back as far as three weeks.
  • 19-May, they reported 225 NH and 204 GP = 429 total.
  • 20-May, they report 439 total deaths, but failed to offer the NH numbers, so I can't break out the two populations for you.
  • 21-May, they report 447 total deaths, but failed to offer the NH numbers, so I can't break out the two populations for you.
  • 22-May, they report 457 total deaths, less 205 NH (reported) leaves 252 GP.
  • 23-May, they report 474 total deaths, less 244 NH (reported) leaves 230 GP. This appears to be a significant shift of deaths BACK from GP to NH whereas several days before we saw the opposite shift.
  • 26-May, they report 481 total deaths, less 281 NH (reported) leaves 200 GP. A net increase of 7 deaths (good news!), but an increase of those attributed to NH of 37 and a decrease of those attributed to GP of 30. The shift of reported deaths back from GP to NH seems to continue...
  • 27-May, they report 491 total deaths, less ??? NH (not reported) leaves ??? GP (cannot derive).

As of tomorrow, Thu 28-May, I'll cease to report these top lines, as I think the point has been made that there is inconsistent reporting in this area of deaths attributed to where and what.

You can see "Just the data please" by clicking here.

Errata in the State DOH data:

Infection and Fatality Percentages for Two Distinct Populations:
Click image for full resolution charts.

Road to Reopening for Two Distinct Populations:
Click image for full resolution charts.

Some important notes on this new set of charts. They are dense with information and nuance. Please click the thumbs above and those charts will open fullsize in a new tab. Then let me unpack a few thoughts.

First, these stacked bars show the combined new cases (on a trailing 14-day basis as required by the 50 per 100k rubric) - but they do so while also showing the respective contribution of the Nursing Home vs General Public. Be careful to pay attention to the Y-Axis on each chart - these vary measurably from county to county. The black line and the top number above each bar is the total as reported by the state in one place, but doesn't add up when considering the Nursing Home and General Public numbers. The gap is the questionmark. You will also note the slope of each trendline (based on the black total line) is in the upper right corner of the chart. If the slope (the number before the 'x') is negative, then the number of cases is declining by that number of cases per day. If the number is positive, it is increasing by that many cases per day.

But there is more to see here. As I pointed out another day: York county is an exception when it comes to nursing home success. Why? We should all learn from them. That is one end of the spectrum. In Cumberland county, while trending down overall, this county has done as spectacular a job of containing the virus in the general public as York has in containing it inside the nursing homes. Why? However, and sadly, 97% of the deaths in Cumberland county have been in the nursing homes, or conversely, one of the largest counties in the region has had one of the lowest genaral public infection rates with only 3% (one soul out of 35) of the deaths coming from that demographic. Why? Note that if the reopening rubric had been applied to the general public only in Cumberland county - it would have reopened weeks and weeks ago. Meanwhile, Lancaster, Dauphin and Lebanon county are seeing a decrease in new cases in the general public, while continuing to see increases in the nursing home population. Why? In many counties, if we apply the rubric to the general population only, in every case except Dauphin and Franklin (not shown here) counties, most counties could reopen within days. Said plainly, and again, are we unduly burdening the many to protect the few - when that burden is actually doing little or nothing to actually protect the few? Just asking the question. Perhaps we should consider reversing our thinking on this.

Perhaps we could focus more on improving the situation around the few - not only to help THEM, but as long as these fertile petri dishes of the few (the nursing homes) are hotbeds of Covid19, not only do they harm the nursing home residents and workers - but they are more likely to CARRY THE VIRUS OUT into the general public than the general public is likely to carry the virus IN. Based on the average infection rates in each population - there is a 1 in 429 chance of someone bringing the virus INTO the nursing home and a 1 in 8 chance of someone carrying it out. It is simply in everyone's interest to fix that disparity. Not constrain the 2 million to do nothing to protect the 12 thousand. Perhaps it really is the other way around. Just something to think about.

The 'Nursing Home Tables': (click or tap to enlarge)

The 'Flatten-the-curve Spaghetti Chart':

New Daily Infections:

Click here to go to the official data source

Courtesy of the concerned citizen: www.JoeChiarella.com
NOTE: this page makes no cookies, and consumes no cookies. Nothing baked here but these charts.