WHICH COUNTRIES DO BEST IN BEATING COVID-19? And Worst. A Must See!

[Quixote1818]

Last edited Sat May 9, 2020, 01:08 PM - Edit history (1)

Series of graphs of each country. Very good visual of which countries are doing really well and which are not. Guess where the US is:


https://www.endcoronavirus.org/countries?fbclid=IwAR3gscCAsC6Pc9nH4hbvZrWX82uyi7tFqVdkJ2LHIIFS2_h52mAbkCoJg7o


A look at the states: https://www.endcoronavirus.org/states

[cyclonefence]

1. Stories on TV say

the countries doing best are those run by women. Forbes magazine agrees:



?fit=scale

[LAS14]

2. Thanks! And, from what I've heard, if you take out New York, the U.S. is way worse!!!!! nt

[hardluck]

3. How so?

New York accounts for 1/3 of US deaths and has the highest deaths/million at over 1,300/million - significantly higher than the US as a whole at 238/million.

[Squinch]

5. Up until now, New York has accounted for the vast majority of cases and deaths.

That has begun to decrease dramatically. It's number is so outsized, though, it makes it look as if the cases and deaths in the country as a whole are coming down.

But if you take out that enormous number from New York, and if you take out the downward trajectory of the numbers from New York recently, the numbers of cases and deaths in the rest of he country are actually going up.

[hardluck]

6. Gotcha. That makes more sense. nt

[yonder]

4. Iraq is shown to have a huge double bump.

As the U.S. proceeds with its "reopening", will it show a similar result?

[smirkymonkey]

7. Interesting. Thanks for posting!

[Silent3]

8. I think these graphs are a bit misleading

Apparently what they've done is take the highest number of new daily cases, whatever that number might be, and they've stretched the vertical scale of each graph so that highest level is just as high as the highest level on every other graph.

A state could therefore have a very low per capita rate of infection, even much lower than another state which had hit a very high peak and started back down, but the state with the much lower rate would be rated as worse than the state with the higher rate purely on the basis of the shape, NOT THE SCALE, of their curve.

While there is something to be said for whether or not a state (or country) has leveled out or turned downward yet, the importance of that can be greatly exaggerated when overall scale is ignored.

Is a state which has grown from 10 new cases per 100,000 per day to 20 new cases, without a downturn yet, truly worse off than a state that went from 10 up to 500 then back down to 250? By this metric, the state currently dealing with 250 new cases per 100,000 per day would be classified as doing a "better" job than the state with only 20 per day.