Excluding N.C. (which has data gaps), here they are, best to worst:Answers to follow.
Excluding N.C. (which has data gaps), here they are, best to worst:
State Excess Death% Observed Deaths Expected Deaths
Hawaii 3.04% 26174 25402
New Hampshire 5.16% 28942 27521
Massachusetts 8.58% 139194 128198
Maine 8.75% 34494 31718
Puerto Rico 8.89% 69055 63417
Nebraska 11.53% 40828 36607
Washington 11.56% 138918 124521
Minnesota 11.67% 108391 97064
Rhode Island 12.02% 24992 22311
District of Columbia 12.02% 15276 13637
Maryland 12.02% 123409 110163
Iowa 12.06% 73077 65215
Wisconsin 12.77% 129655 114973
Pennsylvania 13.59% 328603 289288
Delaware 14.07% 23947 20993
Connecticut 14.15% 77693 68061
North Dakota 14.27% 17687 15478
Ohio 14.44% 308283 269394
Vermont 14.56% 13769 12019
Missouri 14.59% 160949 140456
Oregon 15.57% 89970 77851
Utah 15.79% 48250 41669
Virginia 15.81% 174183 150404
Indiana 15.86% 166481 143696
New York 16.04% 247177 213006
South Dakota 16.23% 20449 17594
Kansas 16.28% 66103 56848
Idaho 16.32% 36822 31655
Illinois 16.86% 263366 225378
Florida 16.86% 534842 457672
New Jersey 16.90% 188733 161452
Kentucky 17.02% 122322 104529
United States 17.69% 7229063 6142422
Michigan 17.91% 244404 207280
Colorado 18.24% 101908 86191
Arkansas 18.46% 82350 69517
Tennessee 18.65% 194240 163704
California 19.09% 689587 579070
Oklahoma 19.13% 101494 85196
Montana 19.29% 26104 21883
West Virginia 19.55% 58182 48669
Nevada 19.61% 69393 58018
South Carolina 19.61% 130269 108907
Louisiana 20.28% 119247 99141
Alabama 20.97% 138024 114102
Georgia 22.49% 227503 185733
Alaska 22.70% 11546 9410
Wyoming 23.58% 12097 9789
New Mexico 24.53% 50568 40608
Texas 24.84% 555628 445085
Mississippi 25.22% 84259 67287
Arizona 26.53% 169159 133692
Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19
Figures present excess deaths associated with COVID-19 at the national and state levels.www.cdc.gov
Well, I think there were clearly a lot of factors at work. For example, drier states generally had more trouble than more humid states, as you'd expect when fighting a respiratory ailment. And low-density states had an easier time of it than high-density states, as you'd expect when trying to prevent transmission.Thanks for posting. What conclusions do you think we should draw from this?
It's obvious isn't it?Figuring out which states had the best pandemic performance can be tough for a few reasons. One of the biggest is that standards about when to label something a COVID death varied from state to state. Also, there are arguments about whether certain policies may have done more overall harm than good (e.g., tight lockdowns that may have saved people from COVID, but resulted in more indirect deaths from isolation, by way of suicide or drug overdoses).
There is a way around those problems, though. Simply compare the number of people who died in each state to the number who were expected to die based on pre-pandemic mortality rates in the state. For example, if, on average, 0.8% of the population of a state died per year, between 2015 and 2019, and then 1.0% died per year during the pandemic, that means people were dying at a 25% higher rate than normal.
Many of those extra deaths may be by way of indirect mechanisms (e.g., overwhelmed hospitals having more traffic-accident victims dying because ICU's were full of COVID patients), but either way it implicates state policy decisions.
So, in those terms, which places were most successful at minimizing the mortality impact of the pandemic on their people? Answers to follow.
Yes, he's a schmuck who woefully mishandled the situation. However, I think it' worth remembering that it's not all on the governor, or even the state government in general. In some states, governors tried to do the right thing, but had a lot of trouble getting localities to cooperate (or had partisan judges overturning their orders). In other states, governors were asleep at the wheel but mayors, school administrators, and county-level officials picked up the slack (as did individuals getting vaccinated in reasonably high numbers, as in Florida).I love the fact AZ was last. Everyone in AZ hates the Gov. He was so incompetent during Covid and the numbers show it.
Well, that's one way to look at it.It's obvious isn't it?
More Californians were alive at the end of the pandemic than any other state!
Just to consider the stakes, consider these two, from near opposing ends of that list: Massachusetts and Texas. Imagine if Texas had succeeded in protecting its people only as well as Massachusetts did -- in other words, still a pretty miserable couple years, but one when mortality was up 8.58%, instead of 22.84%.Massachusetts 8.58% 139194 128198
Texas 24.84% 555628 445085
Now add in the fact that only 12 states had lower death rates than CA. The largest of those states, CO, has about 25% of the population of CA.Well, that's one way to look at it.
Live on an islandThanks for posting. What conclusions do you think we should draw from this?
That probably helped Hawaii. After all, if they required testing by anyone coming into Hawaii by plane, that was practically everyone coming into the state, which gave them a tool that most places just didn't have (other than PR). However, it's worth pointing out that AK functions a lot like an island for purposes of the movement of people. The VAST majority of people traveling to Alaska come in by plane, and Alaska had the same theoretical tool as Hawaii did to test virtually everyone coming into the state. It was, for practical purposes, a population island. Yet it had one of the worst pandemic performances of any state.Live on an island
Live on an island
As a percent, or in total deaths?That probably helped Hawaii. After all, if they required testing by anyone coming into Hawaii by plane, that was practically everyone coming into the state, which gave them a tool that most places just didn't have (other than PR). However, it's worth pointing out that AK functions a lot like an island for purposes of the movement of people. The VAST majority of people traveling to Alaska come in by plane, and Alaska had the same theoretical tool as Hawaii did to test virtually everyone coming into the state. It was, for practical purposes, a population island. Yet it had one of the worst pandemic performances of any state.
As a percent, or in total deaths?
Low population combined with complete rural lack of hospitals probably did Alaska in.
That, and the canadians.
In terms of percentage rise in mortality relative to pre-pandemic mortality.As a percent, or in total deaths?
Low population combined with complete rural lack of hospitals probably did Alaska in.
That, and the canadians.
I have liberal thoughts all the time. Fortunately, I'm fairly neutral, and I manage to control my impulses when it comes to posting about assumptions of others. I understand that people aren't binary, which you would think would be a simple enough concept. And yet, here we are.You really should try reading the OP - that is if you don't think it may infect you with liberal thoughts.
So total numbers are lower, but low population drives the percent up.In terms of percentage rise in mortality relative to pre-pandemic mortality.
Could be true. However, there’s really no excuse for most Alaskans having poor access to medical care. Notwithstanding the state’s self promoted-image, it’s a pretty urbanized place. The large majority of residents live very close to one of a few decently-sized cities. Maine, for example, actually has a much lower percentage of its residents living in urban areas (about 39%, compared to 66% in Alaska.).So total numbers are lower, but low population drives the percent up.
IMO, Alaska problem, then, rested entirely on their access to medical care. Or...in this case, their lack of.
Hopefully their governing body sees that, and acts.
Probably won't, though.
I registered here a couple years ago, in addition to a few other sites, to try to figure out where I wanted to post. I ended up posting on Salon pretty much exclusively. Then Salon shut down their comment section. At that point I went to a place called Politicalhotline. I didn’t like the way moderation is done there, so I’ve gone back to a few of the other places I had posted before, to see which I like better.I've never seen a more obvious repeat poster.
Account never used for 2 years, a bunch of people get banned, it suddenly gets activated after 3 whole years.
0 posts in 3 years and then suddenly HI, let me post 100 times a day.
Does this make it a bit clearer?Thanks for posting. What conclusions do you think we should draw from this?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?