![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr03PzGMF65qgu4OF0lGMH8AynodVNK1NoMtB8j9pM-danm6R4WFZClDMC-Q_b6g550JEk7Qthd0KQYxqImLGC_Oq_umYxELcshLq1Owt5VYInxeVTQLt4YBVEcqTJ2eJ0_z7CkIsoqw/s320-rw/Cases+marked+up+%25282%2529.jpg) |
The good thing about this chunk of data is that it is relatively flat compared to earlier data |
Still working with the assumption of a six day time-lag between diagnosis and death of the patient. I have yet to see a compelling reason (i.e. data driven reason) to use any other time-lag to analyze data. From April 2 until April 10, inclusive, there were 13,449 patients positively diagnosed with Covid-19.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqU72kpdQzUIxNbgUdOmARi1FbymM85xy9Ch9CT014L5nwP5as4j2nwndDvowa0IDcWUooXIjlKAJAByHL5FTeVIDMAOpuFW97kmytO2hzA31SywkfXxh33qiodHhoo-7DtRCT1tOSIQ/s320-rw/Deaths+marked+up+%25282%2529.jpg) |
Same as "Daily Cases" but six days later |
From April 8-to-April 16 (reports publicized at 3:00 EST) there were 1247 deaths attributed to Covid-19 for a death-rate of 9%.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIYStPO1VKuxeEqWKYSHFNWsRlmJN0F7xtJqxqT8NK7Tbde_xftzAOHPA46gogxb2ttrFufUCZpDFDNh-BD8eH3YmqDGxTSkGnVYNNLAYWgTmRdpq9PjX_YxeqTb2hQAYVYq7pmBdPaQ/s320-rw/Death+rates+six+days+later.JPG) |
The ratio between the number of cases and the number of deaths six days later. The data looks bimodal with one population hovering around 6% and the other population bouncing around 12%. Unfortunately, the last three data-points are from the second, presumed population. |
The bump in death-rates is troublesome. Is it due to exhaustion or to more lethal strains of Covid-19 becoming more prevalent?
We have not turned the corner in Michigan, yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Readers who are willing to comment make this a better blog. Civil dialog is a valuable thing.