I’m finally publishing some graphs that I compiled using CDC data exports from October 21: https://wikiworldorder.medium.com/oct-21-maryland-centric-covid-related-mortality-rankings-670522e4bcff This round of analysis primarily involved the northeastern states in the U.S., which seemed to experience very similar first waves of excess mortality. Here, I rank various jurisdictions by their total number of COVID-related deaths. Figure 1: COVID-Related Deaths (CDC) per Million of WHO Standard Population Distribution This is the most statistically important graph in this post. Each state’s COVID-related deaths are broken down by age group, then scaled to a World Health Organization defined Standard Population Distribution (Table 4). This makes the data closer to useful for experts' analysis, and provides more accurate comparisons than crude mortality numbers. After scaling for a WHO population distribution by age group… Governor Hogan presided over 371 deaths per standardized million here in Maryland, compared to Sweden’s 203. So despite the dramatic difference in 2020 public health policies, Maryland had 85% more age-group-standardized deaths than Sweden. Sweden also experienced fewer COVID-related deaths than most of the northeastern United States… safer than 17 out of the other 24 jurisdictions in this analysis. https://youtu.be/-D8MXQP0hSM https://wikiworldorder.medium.com/oct-21-maryland-centric-covid-related-mortality-rankings-670522e4bcff
2Upvotes
thumb_upthumb_downchat_bubble

More from wikiworldorder

Doublespeak Gum

1.07k views ·
It seems more 'serious people' are slowly coming out. Unfortunately it was in the Daily Mail ;-p but this is op-ed is by a seemingly serious person, Lord Sutton, a recent UK Supreme Court Justice: "And that is the heart of the problem – PR has taken over from serious policy-making." ... "In his press conference on May 10, the Prime Minister proudly declared that the Government would 'not be driven by economic necessity' – as if the population's livelihoods were of no importance. Since then, he has only casually and intermittently asked himself whether their remedies were worse than the disease. As a parliamentary committee reported in July, there has never been a proper impact assessment or cost-benefit analysis to assess the wider effects on our society. The scientists have been no better. They were afraid of being made scapegoats by a Government which pretended to be 'guided by the science'. This provoked a defensive and myopic resort to over-reaction." ... "In all of these respects, only we know enough about our own circumstances to judge what is right for us and those around us. Put simply, we can look after ourselves better than the Government, whose solutions are indiscriminate. The insistence on coercing the entire population regardless of personal circumstances is disproportionate, inefficient and destructive. It ignores most of the social, psychological and economic considerations. It is indifferent to basic considerations of humanity. It has serious collateral effects on other aspects of our lives, which may be more important to us than they are to scientists and politicians. It is also morally and constitutionally indefensible in a country which is not yet a totalitarian state, like China. The Government has not earned our trust. Sooner or later, people will take back control of their own lives and do the right thing, whatever Ministers say." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8973529/LORD-SUMPTION-morally-wrong-government-control-freaks-tell-Christmas.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sumption,_Lord_Sumption
9 views ·

More from wikiworldorder

Doublespeak Gum

1.07k views ·
It seems more 'serious people' are slowly coming out. Unfortunately it was in the Daily Mail ;-p but this is op-ed is by a seemingly serious person, Lord Sutton, a recent UK Supreme Court Justice: "And that is the heart of the problem – PR has taken over from serious policy-making." ... "In his press conference on May 10, the Prime Minister proudly declared that the Government would 'not be driven by economic necessity' – as if the population's livelihoods were of no importance. Since then, he has only casually and intermittently asked himself whether their remedies were worse than the disease. As a parliamentary committee reported in July, there has never been a proper impact assessment or cost-benefit analysis to assess the wider effects on our society. The scientists have been no better. They were afraid of being made scapegoats by a Government which pretended to be 'guided by the science'. This provoked a defensive and myopic resort to over-reaction." ... "In all of these respects, only we know enough about our own circumstances to judge what is right for us and those around us. Put simply, we can look after ourselves better than the Government, whose solutions are indiscriminate. The insistence on coercing the entire population regardless of personal circumstances is disproportionate, inefficient and destructive. It ignores most of the social, psychological and economic considerations. It is indifferent to basic considerations of humanity. It has serious collateral effects on other aspects of our lives, which may be more important to us than they are to scientists and politicians. It is also morally and constitutionally indefensible in a country which is not yet a totalitarian state, like China. The Government has not earned our trust. Sooner or later, people will take back control of their own lives and do the right thing, whatever Ministers say." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8973529/LORD-SUMPTION-morally-wrong-government-control-freaks-tell-Christmas.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Sumption,_Lord_Sumption
9 views ·