March 18 US Confirmed Coronavirus Cases
In all my reading of Coronavirus case numbers, what I don't see is the density of cases by state or region, and to me that is the most critical way to understand how bad the outbreak is. So I created my own list.
My methodology: I am getting my numbers from the excellent site "Covid-19 in US and Canada: Real Time Updates with Credible Sources". I take the number of cases and divide by population (using Wikipedia to get estimates from 2018 or 19) to get the number of cases per 100,000 people. I have 56 entities that I'm tracking: all fifty states, plus DC, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, American Somoa and the Northern Mariana Islands
By State
So, what do we see here? What is the significance?
Well, first off we can take a look at how this will spread and grow over time. One easy way to see that is through this chart:
This shows the range of infection levels and how many states are there. Each column represents a doubling of the infection level of the column to the left. So we have 4 states with little or no infections, and 2 states with between 8 and 16 cases per 100,000.
This chart will be an easy way to see over time the spread of infections.
Another thing that keeps popping out at me is where we think the 'trouble spots' are. We know that New York and Washington have bad outbreaks. We also hear a lot about California, yet if you look at the list California is 18th in terms of cases per 100,000. So why are we hearing so much about California? And what about Louisiana? It is 3rd, followed closely by DC and New Jersey. Why don't we hear anything about those states?
One answer is that we may need to drill further down and look at counties. Here is a list of counties that provides some more insight:
Manhattan is tops, and that probably isn't a big surprise, but look at what else is going on in New York. Westchester (New Rochelle) has also been hit hard, and Nassau county (which is the closest suburban county on Long Island, bordering Queens and Brooklyn). In New Jersey Bergen County, directly across the Hudson from Manhattan, has pretty high numbers, too. The Seattle area of course (Snohomish is the county north of Seattle, and not far from Kirkland (King County), the epicenter of the Washington epidemic) has a high number of cases, and you can also see what's going on in California, with San Mateo County (located between San Francisco and Silicon Valley) having over 10 cases per 100K, while some other bay area counties are also above 5. Meanwhile Southern California has much lower rates.
But two things strike me as really surprising: Orleans Parrish (New Orleans) and Eagle County Colorado (Vail). The number of cases in these two counties isn't particularly impressive, but Orleans Parrish is mid-sized and Eagle County tiny, meaning their rates of infection are very high. Why? Obviously tourism is the factor for both; Mardi Gras in New Orleans was just three-four weeks ago, a time when Coronavirus was around but no one was tracking it. Vail of course is in ski season. So what about Nevada? I've been suspicious for a while that Las Vegas's numbers were too low. Nevada had a really large spike in cases yesterday, but I didn't record the change. Looking right now, Clark County (Las Vegas) is at a rate now comparable with Contra Costa in the Bay Area, and I expect that to grow. I will add them to the list.
You might also ask about Florida, with lots of winter tourism and cruise ship departure points. Unfortunately Florida's reporting is not great, with roughly a third of their total cases not assigned to any county, but I'm going to start keeping an eye on them. Plus, now we are in Spring Break, with Daytona and South Padre Island particular areas of concern.
Finally, you might reasonably ask what this all means? How high an infection rate is "scary"? We know, for example, that South Korea has handled their rate pretty well, while Italy has not. It's all about "flattening the curve", keeping the number of infections at a level where hospitals can treat those who become seriously ill. If the hospitals run out room/beds/supplies/staff then they cannot treat patients effectively, and more will die than would otherwise.
Italy had ~31,000 cases as of Mar 17, and we know their healthcare facilities were fully overwhelmed. We could divide by the population of Italy, but really we should divide that by the population of Lombardy, where the overwhelming number of cases are. Doing so gives us a rough number of 300 cases per 100,000. We're not there yet, but there are some concerns. I think Manhattan will be okay for a little while as there are other resources in the NYC area, but I have to imaging that Eagle County CO can't take too much more. I suspect New Orleans will also be overwhelmed soon, given the poverty there and the lack of nearby resources.
My methodology: I am getting my numbers from the excellent site "Covid-19 in US and Canada: Real Time Updates with Credible Sources". I take the number of cases and divide by population (using Wikipedia to get estimates from 2018 or 19) to get the number of cases per 100,000 people. I have 56 entities that I'm tracking: all fifty states, plus DC, Guam, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, American Somoa and the Northern Mariana Islands
By State
So, what do we see here? What is the significance?
Well, first off we can take a look at how this will spread and grow over time. One easy way to see that is through this chart:
This shows the range of infection levels and how many states are there. Each column represents a doubling of the infection level of the column to the left. So we have 4 states with little or no infections, and 2 states with between 8 and 16 cases per 100,000.
This chart will be an easy way to see over time the spread of infections.
Another thing that keeps popping out at me is where we think the 'trouble spots' are. We know that New York and Washington have bad outbreaks. We also hear a lot about California, yet if you look at the list California is 18th in terms of cases per 100,000. So why are we hearing so much about California? And what about Louisiana? It is 3rd, followed closely by DC and New Jersey. Why don't we hear anything about those states?
One answer is that we may need to drill further down and look at counties. Here is a list of counties that provides some more insight:
Manhattan is tops, and that probably isn't a big surprise, but look at what else is going on in New York. Westchester (New Rochelle) has also been hit hard, and Nassau county (which is the closest suburban county on Long Island, bordering Queens and Brooklyn). In New Jersey Bergen County, directly across the Hudson from Manhattan, has pretty high numbers, too. The Seattle area of course (Snohomish is the county north of Seattle, and not far from Kirkland (King County), the epicenter of the Washington epidemic) has a high number of cases, and you can also see what's going on in California, with San Mateo County (located between San Francisco and Silicon Valley) having over 10 cases per 100K, while some other bay area counties are also above 5. Meanwhile Southern California has much lower rates.
But two things strike me as really surprising: Orleans Parrish (New Orleans) and Eagle County Colorado (Vail). The number of cases in these two counties isn't particularly impressive, but Orleans Parrish is mid-sized and Eagle County tiny, meaning their rates of infection are very high. Why? Obviously tourism is the factor for both; Mardi Gras in New Orleans was just three-four weeks ago, a time when Coronavirus was around but no one was tracking it. Vail of course is in ski season. So what about Nevada? I've been suspicious for a while that Las Vegas's numbers were too low. Nevada had a really large spike in cases yesterday, but I didn't record the change. Looking right now, Clark County (Las Vegas) is at a rate now comparable with Contra Costa in the Bay Area, and I expect that to grow. I will add them to the list.
You might also ask about Florida, with lots of winter tourism and cruise ship departure points. Unfortunately Florida's reporting is not great, with roughly a third of their total cases not assigned to any county, but I'm going to start keeping an eye on them. Plus, now we are in Spring Break, with Daytona and South Padre Island particular areas of concern.
Finally, you might reasonably ask what this all means? How high an infection rate is "scary"? We know, for example, that South Korea has handled their rate pretty well, while Italy has not. It's all about "flattening the curve", keeping the number of infections at a level where hospitals can treat those who become seriously ill. If the hospitals run out room/beds/supplies/staff then they cannot treat patients effectively, and more will die than would otherwise.
Italy had ~31,000 cases as of Mar 17, and we know their healthcare facilities were fully overwhelmed. We could divide by the population of Italy, but really we should divide that by the population of Lombardy, where the overwhelming number of cases are. Doing so gives us a rough number of 300 cases per 100,000. We're not there yet, but there are some concerns. I think Manhattan will be okay for a little while as there are other resources in the NYC area, but I have to imaging that Eagle County CO can't take too much more. I suspect New Orleans will also be overwhelmed soon, given the poverty there and the lack of nearby resources.
Comments
Post a Comment