-
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website. -
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Weekly MMWR: Week 30 (2009) - Week 39 (2010)
- Thread starter wotan
- Start date
heavenforever
Active member
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Isn't the pandemic strain the only dominant flu at the mo? Reports I have read seem to indicate that seasonal flu is next to non-existant? Pls correct me if I am wrong.
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Isn't the pandemic strain the only dominant flu at the mo? Reports I have read seem to indicate that seasonal flu is next to non-existant? Pls correct me if I am wrong.
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
yes, no other flu in USA and even ** levels are low
http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140223
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
yes, no other flu in USA and even ** levels are low
http://www.flutrackers.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140223
Ronan Kelly
Retired 2020
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
In the US, H1N1 is the dominant strain, but the levels being observed now are much lower than in a typical flu season. But, and here's the million dollar question, if flu levels are low throughout the country, why was the % of fatalities due to pneumonia and influenza for week 6 the highest week 6 in the past 5 years?
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
In the US, H1N1 is the dominant strain, but the levels being observed now are much lower than in a typical flu season. But, and here's the million dollar question, if flu levels are low throughout the country, why was the % of fatalities due to pneumonia and influenza for week 6 the highest week 6 in the past 5 years?
Missouriwatcher
Editor, Senior Moderator
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
IMO, less testing is occurring, more neg initial tests (low viral load?) fewer tests being submitted to state labs. Yet, "percent positive specimens" (H1N1 majority) rising in many states. EX: Hawaii had higher percent positives for many weeks; then in week 4 showed P&I of 20.3%. RSV levels have been higher since the beginning of Oct. If RSV were a factor, then P&I should have been high for some time.
Alabama shows 49% positive specimens in week 5. Will we be seeing a rise in P&I in the upcoming weeks? (RSV levels have been high since Oct, but have been declining since end of Jan)
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
IMO, less testing is occurring, more neg initial tests (low viral load?) fewer tests being submitted to state labs. Yet, "percent positive specimens" (H1N1 majority) rising in many states. EX: Hawaii had higher percent positives for many weeks; then in week 4 showed P&I of 20.3%. RSV levels have been higher since the beginning of Oct. If RSV were a factor, then P&I should have been high for some time.
Alabama shows 49% positive specimens in week 5. Will we be seeing a rise in P&I in the upcoming weeks? (RSV levels have been high since Oct, but have been declining since end of Jan)
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
I agree.
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
I agree.
adrianmonksfan
Active member
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Part of the reason may be that the denominator - all causes mortality - is lower than for all previous years. I averaged the values for weeks 2 through 6 (I left out week 1 because it may be affected by delays due to the festivities). Here are the numbers for all causes, P&I and ratio:
YEAR: AC / P&I / ratio
2001: 13,117 / 1009 / 7.70%
2002: 12,553 / 942 / 7.52%
2003: 12, 608 / 931 / 7.39%
2004: 13,784 / 1284 / 9.31%
2005: 12,522 / 992 / 7.92%
2006: 12,520 / 930 / 7.42%
2007: 12,175 / 865 / 7.11%
2008: 12,755 / 968 / 7.60%
2009: 12,259 / 877 / 7.15%
2010: 11,583 / 911 / 7.86%
Two wild guesses. The first: AC mortality is down because H1N1 has a lower rate of secondary deaths. Or maybe it's tertiary deaths: I mean death caused by factors other than ARDS.
The second: P&I mortality is high (but only compared to 2007 and 2009) because there is an already high mortality baseline for P&I in this period of the year. In other words, P&I mortality would be high even if there were no "I". We should check the incidence rates of seasonal flu for the previous years, but my impression is that during these weeks flu incidence would not be so high to cause a significant increase in the number of P&I deaths. I admit this is very wild, but before discarding it I think it would be worth examining the correlation between seasonal flu and P&I deaths in previous years.
This is just an attempt to understand the problem - I'm not denying that circulation of H1N1 may be increasing again.
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Part of the reason may be that the denominator - all causes mortality - is lower than for all previous years. I averaged the values for weeks 2 through 6 (I left out week 1 because it may be affected by delays due to the festivities). Here are the numbers for all causes, P&I and ratio:
YEAR: AC / P&I / ratio
2001: 13,117 / 1009 / 7.70%
2002: 12,553 / 942 / 7.52%
2003: 12, 608 / 931 / 7.39%
2004: 13,784 / 1284 / 9.31%
2005: 12,522 / 992 / 7.92%
2006: 12,520 / 930 / 7.42%
2007: 12,175 / 865 / 7.11%
2008: 12,755 / 968 / 7.60%
2009: 12,259 / 877 / 7.15%
2010: 11,583 / 911 / 7.86%
Two wild guesses. The first: AC mortality is down because H1N1 has a lower rate of secondary deaths. Or maybe it's tertiary deaths: I mean death caused by factors other than ARDS.
The second: P&I mortality is high (but only compared to 2007 and 2009) because there is an already high mortality baseline for P&I in this period of the year. In other words, P&I mortality would be high even if there were no "I". We should check the incidence rates of seasonal flu for the previous years, but my impression is that during these weeks flu incidence would not be so high to cause a significant increase in the number of P&I deaths. I admit this is very wild, but before discarding it I think it would be worth examining the correlation between seasonal flu and P&I deaths in previous years.
This is just an attempt to understand the problem - I'm not denying that circulation of H1N1 may be increasing again.
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
fewer cities are reporting this year
earlier I estimated 5%-7.5%
if you account for that, this year's all-cause mortality
is not much lower, despite flulessness
missing in week 6/2010:
Jersey City
Ft.Worth
New Orleans
Phoenix
also missing (again ?) , just not listed since week 47:
Wilmington
Colorado Springs
Pittsburg
Erie,Scranton only partial counts (but same thing the years before)
missing in week 6/2009:
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
fewer cities are reporting this year
earlier I estimated 5%-7.5%
if you account for that, this year's all-cause mortality
is not much lower, despite flulessness
missing in week 6/2010:
Jersey City
Ft.Worth
New Orleans
Phoenix
also missing (again ?) , just not listed since week 47:
Wilmington
Colorado Springs
Pittsburg
Erie,Scranton only partial counts (but same thing the years before)
missing in week 6/2009:
adrianmonksfan
Active member
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Very interesting, and disturbing - if you apply the same estimate (5%-7.5%) to the P&I deaths for weeks 2 through 6, 2010, you get an average between 959 and 984, which is higher than most previous years.
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Very interesting, and disturbing - if you apply the same estimate (5%-7.5%) to the P&I deaths for weeks 2 through 6, 2010, you get an average between 959 and 984, which is higher than most previous years.
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
I'll make an estimate later.
first I needed the average weekly deaths for all cities+regions in the last 14 years:
525,374,97,32,10,9,47,NEW ENGLAND
136,88,29,10,4,4,12,Boston,Mass.
34,25,6,1,0,0,2,Bridgeport,Conn.
16,13,2,0,0,0,1,Cambridge,Mass.
26,21,3,1,0,0,2,Fall River,Mass.
44,29,9,3,1,0,3,Hartford,Conn.
23,18,3,1,0,0,2,Lowell,Mass.
11,8,2,0,0,0,0,Lynn,Mass.
25,20,3,1,0,0,1,New Bedford,Mass.
29,19,5,2,0,0,3,New Haven,Conn.
46,33,8,2,0,1,2,Providence,R.I.
4,3,0,0,0,0,0,Somerville,Mass.
40,28,7,2,0,0,3,Springfield,Mass.
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Waterbury,Conn.
58,43,10,2,0,0,6,Worcester,Mass.
2168,1504,437,149,39,35,115,MID. ATLANTIC
48,34,8,2,0,1,3,Albany,N.Y.
20,16,2,0,0,0,0,Allentown,Pa.
78,55,15,4,1,1,6,Buffalo,N.Y.
29,17,6,2,1,1,1,Camden,N.J.
17,12,3,1,0,0,0,Elizabeth,N.J.
35,27,5,1,0,0,2,Erie,Pa.***
35,23,7,3,0,0,0,Jersey City,N.J.
1117,771,231,80,18,15,46,New York City,N.Y.
44,20,13,7,1,1,2,Newark,N.J.
18,10,4,1,0,0,0,Paterson,N.J.
315,203,70,25,8,6,16,Philadelphia,Pa.
41,29,8,2,0,1,3,Pittsburgh,Pa.***
26,20,3,1,0,0,2,Reading,Pa.
130,100,21,5,1,1,11,Rochester,N.Y.
22,17,3,0,0,0,1,Schenectady,N.Y.
23,18,3,0,0,0,1,Scranton,Pa.***
87,66,14,3,1,1,8,Syracuse,N.Y.
27,18,5,1,0,0,1,Trenton,N.J.
18,14,2,0,0,0,1,Utica,N.Y.
13,10,2,0,0,0,1,Yonkers,N.Y.
1960,1323,411,131,45,47,131,E.N. CENTRAL
49,34,9,2,1,1,2,Akron,Ohio
38,29,7,1,0,0,4,Canton,Ohio
295,175,71,29,9,8,22,Chicago,Ill.
87,58,17,5,2,3,8,Cincinnati,Ohio
178,122,38,10,3,3,6,Cleveland,Ohio
195,131,41,13,4,4,14,Columbus,Ohio
124,90,23,6,2,1,9,Dayton,Ohio
173,97,47,17,5,5,9,Detroit,Mich.
46,35,8,2,0,0,2,Evansville,Ind.
64,46,11,3,1,1,4,Fort Wayne,Ind.
14,7,4,1,0,0,0,Gary,Ind.
56,40,9,2,1,2,5,Grand Rapids,Mich.
188,123,40,12,5,5,11,Indianapolis,Ind.
39,29,7,1,0,0,2,Lansing,Mich.
109,76,22,6,1,2,8,Milwaukee,Wis.
46,34,8,2,0,1,3,Peoria,Ill.
52,38,9,2,1,0,3,Rockford,Ill.
47,36,7,2,0,0,2,South Bend,Ind.
91,67,16,4,1,1,5,Toledo,Ohio
56,45,8,1,0,0,2,Youngstown,Ohio
665,458,129,41,17,16,46,W.N. CENTRAL
60,44,11,2,1,0,5,Des Moines,Iowa
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Duluth,Minn.
28,17,6,2,1,0,1,Kansas City,Kans.
94,61,18,6,2,2,5,Kansas City,Mo.
38,29,6,1,0,0,3,Lincoln,Nebr.
110,77,19,6,2,3,8,Minneapolis,Minn.
82,58,15,4,1,2,7,Omaha,Nebr.
82,49,19,7,3,2,3,St. Louis,Mo.
63,47,10,3,1,1,4,St. Paul,Minn.
76,51,15,5,2,1,4,Wichita,Kans.
1196,754,272,105,34,28,71,S. ATLANTIC
124,71,31,13,4,3,3,Atlanta,Ga.
183,106,46,20,5,3,16,Baltimore,Md.
102,67,21,7,2,2,9,Charlotte,N.C.
143,92,32,11,3,2,7,Jacksonville,Fla.
97,61,21,9,3,1,4,Miami,Fla.
50,32,10,3,1,2,2,Norfolk,Va.
61,36,15,5,2,1,3,Richmond,Va.
53,36,11,3,1,1,4,Savannah,Ga.
58,42,9,3,1,1,4,St. Petersburg,Fla.
183,126,37,12,3,3,11,Tampa,Fla.
121,69,30,12,4,3,2,Washington,D.C.
15,10,3,1,0,0,0,Wilmington,Del.
831,550,183,58,21,17,61,E.S. CENTRAL
166,110,36,11,4,3,14,Birmingham,Ala.
76,53,15,4,1,1,5,Chattanooga,Tenn.
92,63,19,5,1,1,5,Knoxville,Tenn.
65,43,14,4,1,1,5,Lexington,Ky.
160,103,36,12,4,3,12,Memphis,Tenn.
80,53,17,5,2,1,3,Mobile,Ala.
47,32,9,3,1,0,4,Montgomery,Ala.
141,89,33,10,3,3,10,Nashville,Tenn.
1416,909,311,113,44,35,86,W.S. CENTRAL
83,54,18,7,2,2,5,Austin,Tex.
44,29,8,3,1,0,1,Baton Rouge,La.
52,36,10,3,1,1,3,Corpus Christi,Tex.
195,115,46,18,7,6,10,Dallas,Tex.
81,56,15,5,2,1,4,El Paso,Tex.
108,71,23,7,2,3,6,Ft. Worth,Tex.
344,205,82,33,13,9,23,Houston,Tex.
70,44,16,4,2,2,2,Little Rock,Ark.
40,23,9,4,2,1,0,New Orleans,La.
214,147,43,14,5,4,15,San Antonio,Tex.
60,41,12,3,1,1,5,Shreveport,La.
120,84,24,7,2,2,8,Tulsa,Okla.
964,644,197,72,26,20,68,MOUNTAIN
110,74,21,9,3,1,7,Albuquerque,N.M.
41,29,7,2,0,0,3,Boise,Idaho
60,41,11,4,1,1,3,Colo. Springs,Colo.
97,60,21,8,3,4,7,Denver,Colo.
227,148,53,16,5,2,14,Las Vegas,Nev.
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Ogden,Utah
127,76,27,11,5,4,8,Phoenix,Ariz.
29,21,5,1,0,0,2,Pueblo,Colo.
110,73,20,8,3,3,9,Salt Lake City,Utah
129,93,23,7,2,1,8,Tucson,Ariz.
1588,1115,305,101,35,28,137,PACIFIC
15,10,3,0,0,0,1,Berkeley,Calif.
100,70,18,6,2,1,7,Fresno,Calif.
19,15,2,0,0,0,2,Glendale,Calif.
72,53,12,3,1,1,5,Honolulu,Hawaii
67,46,13,4,1,1,9,Long Beach,Calif.
316,218,60,23,8,5,24,Los Angeles,Calif.
23,17,3,1,0,0,2,Pasadena,Calif.
119,83,23,7,2,2,7,Portland,Oreg.
143,100,28,8,3,2,14,Sacramento,Calif.
155,107,30,10,3,3,15,San Diego,Calif.
77,51,16,6,1,1,8,San Francisco,Calif.
169,123,31,9,3,2,16,San Jose,Calif.
29,22,5,1,0,0,3,Santa Cruz,Calif.
120,80,25,9,3,2,6,Seattle,Wash.
58,43,10,2,0,1,5,Spokane,Wash.
98,70,18,5,2,1,5,Tacoma,Wash.
11316,7636,2346,804,277,240,767,TOTAL
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
I'll make an estimate later.
first I needed the average weekly deaths for all cities+regions in the last 14 years:
525,374,97,32,10,9,47,NEW ENGLAND
136,88,29,10,4,4,12,Boston,Mass.
34,25,6,1,0,0,2,Bridgeport,Conn.
16,13,2,0,0,0,1,Cambridge,Mass.
26,21,3,1,0,0,2,Fall River,Mass.
44,29,9,3,1,0,3,Hartford,Conn.
23,18,3,1,0,0,2,Lowell,Mass.
11,8,2,0,0,0,0,Lynn,Mass.
25,20,3,1,0,0,1,New Bedford,Mass.
29,19,5,2,0,0,3,New Haven,Conn.
46,33,8,2,0,1,2,Providence,R.I.
4,3,0,0,0,0,0,Somerville,Mass.
40,28,7,2,0,0,3,Springfield,Mass.
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Waterbury,Conn.
58,43,10,2,0,0,6,Worcester,Mass.
2168,1504,437,149,39,35,115,MID. ATLANTIC
48,34,8,2,0,1,3,Albany,N.Y.
20,16,2,0,0,0,0,Allentown,Pa.
78,55,15,4,1,1,6,Buffalo,N.Y.
29,17,6,2,1,1,1,Camden,N.J.
17,12,3,1,0,0,0,Elizabeth,N.J.
35,27,5,1,0,0,2,Erie,Pa.***
35,23,7,3,0,0,0,Jersey City,N.J.
1117,771,231,80,18,15,46,New York City,N.Y.
44,20,13,7,1,1,2,Newark,N.J.
18,10,4,1,0,0,0,Paterson,N.J.
315,203,70,25,8,6,16,Philadelphia,Pa.
41,29,8,2,0,1,3,Pittsburgh,Pa.***
26,20,3,1,0,0,2,Reading,Pa.
130,100,21,5,1,1,11,Rochester,N.Y.
22,17,3,0,0,0,1,Schenectady,N.Y.
23,18,3,0,0,0,1,Scranton,Pa.***
87,66,14,3,1,1,8,Syracuse,N.Y.
27,18,5,1,0,0,1,Trenton,N.J.
18,14,2,0,0,0,1,Utica,N.Y.
13,10,2,0,0,0,1,Yonkers,N.Y.
1960,1323,411,131,45,47,131,E.N. CENTRAL
49,34,9,2,1,1,2,Akron,Ohio
38,29,7,1,0,0,4,Canton,Ohio
295,175,71,29,9,8,22,Chicago,Ill.
87,58,17,5,2,3,8,Cincinnati,Ohio
178,122,38,10,3,3,6,Cleveland,Ohio
195,131,41,13,4,4,14,Columbus,Ohio
124,90,23,6,2,1,9,Dayton,Ohio
173,97,47,17,5,5,9,Detroit,Mich.
46,35,8,2,0,0,2,Evansville,Ind.
64,46,11,3,1,1,4,Fort Wayne,Ind.
14,7,4,1,0,0,0,Gary,Ind.
56,40,9,2,1,2,5,Grand Rapids,Mich.
188,123,40,12,5,5,11,Indianapolis,Ind.
39,29,7,1,0,0,2,Lansing,Mich.
109,76,22,6,1,2,8,Milwaukee,Wis.
46,34,8,2,0,1,3,Peoria,Ill.
52,38,9,2,1,0,3,Rockford,Ill.
47,36,7,2,0,0,2,South Bend,Ind.
91,67,16,4,1,1,5,Toledo,Ohio
56,45,8,1,0,0,2,Youngstown,Ohio
665,458,129,41,17,16,46,W.N. CENTRAL
60,44,11,2,1,0,5,Des Moines,Iowa
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Duluth,Minn.
28,17,6,2,1,0,1,Kansas City,Kans.
94,61,18,6,2,2,5,Kansas City,Mo.
38,29,6,1,0,0,3,Lincoln,Nebr.
110,77,19,6,2,3,8,Minneapolis,Minn.
82,58,15,4,1,2,7,Omaha,Nebr.
82,49,19,7,3,2,3,St. Louis,Mo.
63,47,10,3,1,1,4,St. Paul,Minn.
76,51,15,5,2,1,4,Wichita,Kans.
1196,754,272,105,34,28,71,S. ATLANTIC
124,71,31,13,4,3,3,Atlanta,Ga.
183,106,46,20,5,3,16,Baltimore,Md.
102,67,21,7,2,2,9,Charlotte,N.C.
143,92,32,11,3,2,7,Jacksonville,Fla.
97,61,21,9,3,1,4,Miami,Fla.
50,32,10,3,1,2,2,Norfolk,Va.
61,36,15,5,2,1,3,Richmond,Va.
53,36,11,3,1,1,4,Savannah,Ga.
58,42,9,3,1,1,4,St. Petersburg,Fla.
183,126,37,12,3,3,11,Tampa,Fla.
121,69,30,12,4,3,2,Washington,D.C.
15,10,3,1,0,0,0,Wilmington,Del.
831,550,183,58,21,17,61,E.S. CENTRAL
166,110,36,11,4,3,14,Birmingham,Ala.
76,53,15,4,1,1,5,Chattanooga,Tenn.
92,63,19,5,1,1,5,Knoxville,Tenn.
65,43,14,4,1,1,5,Lexington,Ky.
160,103,36,12,4,3,12,Memphis,Tenn.
80,53,17,5,2,1,3,Mobile,Ala.
47,32,9,3,1,0,4,Montgomery,Ala.
141,89,33,10,3,3,10,Nashville,Tenn.
1416,909,311,113,44,35,86,W.S. CENTRAL
83,54,18,7,2,2,5,Austin,Tex.
44,29,8,3,1,0,1,Baton Rouge,La.
52,36,10,3,1,1,3,Corpus Christi,Tex.
195,115,46,18,7,6,10,Dallas,Tex.
81,56,15,5,2,1,4,El Paso,Tex.
108,71,23,7,2,3,6,Ft. Worth,Tex.
344,205,82,33,13,9,23,Houston,Tex.
70,44,16,4,2,2,2,Little Rock,Ark.
40,23,9,4,2,1,0,New Orleans,La.
214,147,43,14,5,4,15,San Antonio,Tex.
60,41,12,3,1,1,5,Shreveport,La.
120,84,24,7,2,2,8,Tulsa,Okla.
964,644,197,72,26,20,68,MOUNTAIN
110,74,21,9,3,1,7,Albuquerque,N.M.
41,29,7,2,0,0,3,Boise,Idaho
60,41,11,4,1,1,3,Colo. Springs,Colo.
97,60,21,8,3,4,7,Denver,Colo.
227,148,53,16,5,2,14,Las Vegas,Nev.
28,21,4,1,0,0,2,Ogden,Utah
127,76,27,11,5,4,8,Phoenix,Ariz.
29,21,5,1,0,0,2,Pueblo,Colo.
110,73,20,8,3,3,9,Salt Lake City,Utah
129,93,23,7,2,1,8,Tucson,Ariz.
1588,1115,305,101,35,28,137,PACIFIC
15,10,3,0,0,0,1,Berkeley,Calif.
100,70,18,6,2,1,7,Fresno,Calif.
19,15,2,0,0,0,2,Glendale,Calif.
72,53,12,3,1,1,5,Honolulu,Hawaii
67,46,13,4,1,1,9,Long Beach,Calif.
316,218,60,23,8,5,24,Los Angeles,Calif.
23,17,3,1,0,0,2,Pasadena,Calif.
119,83,23,7,2,2,7,Portland,Oreg.
143,100,28,8,3,2,14,Sacramento,Calif.
155,107,30,10,3,3,15,San Diego,Calif.
77,51,16,6,1,1,8,San Francisco,Calif.
169,123,31,9,3,2,16,San Jose,Calif.
29,22,5,1,0,0,3,Santa Cruz,Calif.
120,80,25,9,3,2,6,Seattle,Wash.
58,43,10,2,0,1,5,Spokane,Wash.
98,70,18,5,2,1,5,Tacoma,Wash.
11316,7636,2346,804,277,240,767,TOTAL
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
and now the average weekly adjusted counts. Average over the last 14 years.
week,total,>65,45-64,25-44,1-24,<1,P+I,(P+I)-ratio
1,11823,8159,2362,799,267,226,913,7723
2,13450,9312,2672,891,297,266,1078,8020
3,12471,8622,2500,830,265,239,1017,8160
4,12969,8968,2585,872,279,256,1048,8080
5,13007,8979,2600,863,288,265,1037,7978
6,12535,8638,2514,843,271,254,969,7734
7,12057,8315,2418,792,270,248,952,7898
8,12288,8466,2459,835,269,243,949,7726
9,12795,8809,2580,847,283,261,1004,7849
10,12593,8664,2528,858,274,251,992,7879
11,12727,8736,2568,857,292,260,1002,7878
12,12253,8404,2465,836,282,254,952,7769
13,12188,8346,2459,839,287,246,941,7726
14,11785,8036,2414,803,266,250,882,7488
15,11689,7934,2405,813,278,246,849,7269
16,11709,7959,2408,814,271,247,852,7280
17,11843,8007,2445,837,292,253,827,6987
18,11087,7487,2296,780,271,242,754,6802
19,11116,7468,2320,802,273,242,736,6625
20,11514,7737,2411,825,282,245,744,6463
21,10668,7159,2237,772,259,233,676,6343
22,10215,6819,2144,758,269,215,661,6479
23,11587,7730,2433,856,304,253,728,6289
24,11098,7405,2331,818,285,248,710,6400
25,11175,7431,2354,839,295,246,677,6065
26,10397,6886,2209,766,288,236,626,6029
27,9642,6378,2048,728,271,206,578,5997
28,11210,7403,2395,843,310,244,665,5938
29,11254,7421,2410,852,309,253,663,5890
30,10904,7170,2340,830,304,246,639,5863
31,10596,6968,2266,808,291,250,609,5747
32,10763,7085,2300,827,298,234,632,5874
33,10478,6899,2250,794,287,238,601,5740
34,10634,7009,2266,815,292,239,592,5575
35,10282,6795,2186,765,279,239,592,5760
36,9562,6313,2047,725,251,209,548,5739
37,11085,7329,2361,839,294,251,642,5796
38,10957,7253,2341,814,292,237,662,6049
39,10664,7085,2262,791,270,240,653,6123
40,10698,7103,2262,790,282,244,643,6019
41,10545,7034,2217,787,266,232,657,6238
42,11076,7381,2351,812,276,239,698,6310
43,11331,7572,2373,839,287,242,713,6297
44,10697,7158,2248,779,264,231,691,6467
45,10614,7158,2201,761,256,224,669,6307
46,10937,7396,2275,759,255,231,706,6463
47,9871,6666,2070,684,229,204,631,6395
48,11141,7546,2323,771,261,226,733,6587
49,12153,8210,2544,840,280,261,808,6651
50,11656,7912,2434,789,270,239,790,6780
51,10602,7258,2173,707,241,210,734,6926
52,8422,5821,1689,563,191,152,621,7382
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
and now the average weekly adjusted counts. Average over the last 14 years.
week,total,>65,45-64,25-44,1-24,<1,P+I,(P+I)-ratio
1,11823,8159,2362,799,267,226,913,7723
2,13450,9312,2672,891,297,266,1078,8020
3,12471,8622,2500,830,265,239,1017,8160
4,12969,8968,2585,872,279,256,1048,8080
5,13007,8979,2600,863,288,265,1037,7978
6,12535,8638,2514,843,271,254,969,7734
7,12057,8315,2418,792,270,248,952,7898
8,12288,8466,2459,835,269,243,949,7726
9,12795,8809,2580,847,283,261,1004,7849
10,12593,8664,2528,858,274,251,992,7879
11,12727,8736,2568,857,292,260,1002,7878
12,12253,8404,2465,836,282,254,952,7769
13,12188,8346,2459,839,287,246,941,7726
14,11785,8036,2414,803,266,250,882,7488
15,11689,7934,2405,813,278,246,849,7269
16,11709,7959,2408,814,271,247,852,7280
17,11843,8007,2445,837,292,253,827,6987
18,11087,7487,2296,780,271,242,754,6802
19,11116,7468,2320,802,273,242,736,6625
20,11514,7737,2411,825,282,245,744,6463
21,10668,7159,2237,772,259,233,676,6343
22,10215,6819,2144,758,269,215,661,6479
23,11587,7730,2433,856,304,253,728,6289
24,11098,7405,2331,818,285,248,710,6400
25,11175,7431,2354,839,295,246,677,6065
26,10397,6886,2209,766,288,236,626,6029
27,9642,6378,2048,728,271,206,578,5997
28,11210,7403,2395,843,310,244,665,5938
29,11254,7421,2410,852,309,253,663,5890
30,10904,7170,2340,830,304,246,639,5863
31,10596,6968,2266,808,291,250,609,5747
32,10763,7085,2300,827,298,234,632,5874
33,10478,6899,2250,794,287,238,601,5740
34,10634,7009,2266,815,292,239,592,5575
35,10282,6795,2186,765,279,239,592,5760
36,9562,6313,2047,725,251,209,548,5739
37,11085,7329,2361,839,294,251,642,5796
38,10957,7253,2341,814,292,237,662,6049
39,10664,7085,2262,791,270,240,653,6123
40,10698,7103,2262,790,282,244,643,6019
41,10545,7034,2217,787,266,232,657,6238
42,11076,7381,2351,812,276,239,698,6310
43,11331,7572,2373,839,287,242,713,6297
44,10697,7158,2248,779,264,231,691,6467
45,10614,7158,2201,761,256,224,669,6307
46,10937,7396,2275,759,255,231,706,6463
47,9871,6666,2070,684,229,204,631,6395
48,11141,7546,2323,771,261,226,733,6587
49,12153,8210,2544,840,280,261,808,6651
50,11656,7912,2434,789,270,239,790,6780
51,10602,7258,2173,707,241,210,734,6926
52,8422,5821,1689,563,191,152,621,7382
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Jersey City:35,23,7,3,0,0,0
Ft.Worth:108,71,23,7,2,3,6
New Orleans:40,23,9,4,2,1,0
Phoenix:127,76,27,11,5,4,8
Wilmington:15,10,3,1,0,0,0
Colorado Springs:60,41,11,4,1,1,3
Pittsburg:41,29,8,2,0,1,3
----------------------------------------
430,277,92,36,14,14,24
only 4% ? Maybe more since Ft.Worth,Phoenix grew the last years
added to 11154,7462,2529,611,215,202,863
gives: 11584,7739,2621,647,229,216,887 - ratio=7.66
average week 6: 12535,8638,2514,843,271,254,969 - ratio=773
sum for weeks 35-51:
all numbers adjusted with estimates for missing reports(I hope)
~35000 fewer total deaths in USA in weeks 35-51 2009 than normal
but ~3000 more P+I - deaths in that period than normal
same for weeks 18-34:
and weeks 1-17:
fewer US-people are dying in those 122(now 117) cities
older people were leaving the big cities in 2009 because
of the financial crisis or such ?
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Jersey City:35,23,7,3,0,0,0
Ft.Worth:108,71,23,7,2,3,6
New Orleans:40,23,9,4,2,1,0
Phoenix:127,76,27,11,5,4,8
Wilmington:15,10,3,1,0,0,0
Colorado Springs:60,41,11,4,1,1,3
Pittsburg:41,29,8,2,0,1,3
----------------------------------------
430,277,92,36,14,14,24
only 4% ? Maybe more since Ft.Worth,Phoenix grew the last years
added to 11154,7462,2529,611,215,202,863
gives: 11584,7739,2621,647,229,216,887 - ratio=7.66
average week 6: 12535,8638,2514,843,271,254,969 - ratio=773
sum for weeks 35-51:
Code:
2009: 175082 115267 41512 10839 3948 3459 12305
average 1996-2009: 183877 123177 38676 13261 4560 3967 11580
average 2005-2009: 181366 119427 41796 11815 4306 3933 11465all numbers adjusted with estimates for missing reports(I hope)
~35000 fewer total deaths in USA in weeks 35-51 2009 than normal
but ~3000 more P+I - deaths in that period than normal
same for weeks 18-34:
Code:
2009: 179143 116534 42813 11549 4306 3851 11523
average 14y: 184345 122464 39020 13722 4893 4077 11299
average 05y: 183129 119490 42320 12393 4710 4101 11351and weeks 1-17:
Code:
2009: 203991 136541 46716 12188 4288 4184 14631
average 14y: 210192 144361 42390 14236 4739 4271 16272
average 5y: 208070 140532 45933 12690 4517 4265 15793fewer US-people are dying in those 122(now 117) cities
older people were leaving the big cities in 2009 because
of the financial crisis or such ?
Ronan Kelly
Retired 2020
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Excellent work gsgs. Thank you for all the time you have put in on this.:applause:
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Excellent work gsgs. Thank you for all the time you have put in on this.:applause:
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Thanks everyone!
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Thanks everyone!
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
2009 as compared with the average 2005-2009:
the 2008/9 flu-season was mild, 7.36% fewer people died from P+I than average.
Then we have a general trend, that fewer dead people are registered in these 122
big cities. That trend did even increase in the flu-weeks 35-51.
But deaths from P+I did increase nevertheless by ~7% during that time.
So when we compare total deaths in the 122 cities with previous years,
we have to account for 1.) reduced reporting since 2009 --> ~5%
2.) fewer people deaths being reported in the cities --> ~3%
8% in total, so multiply reported total deaths by 1.08 to compare with
2007,2006,...
total deaths in USA 1996-2006:
can it be, that there are such big differences in the ratios
for the age-groups ? (old people die rural, young people die urban)
That induces quite some bias into the MMWR statistics
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
2009 as compared with the average 2005-2009:
Code:
weeks, all, >64, 45-64, 25-44, 1-25, <1, P+I
------------------------------------------------------------
01-17:-1.96%,-2.84%,+1.70%,-3.96%,-5.07%,-1.90%,-7.36%
18-34:-2.18%,-2.62%,+1.16%,-6.81%,-8.58%,-6.10%,+1.52%
35-51:-3.46%,-3.48%,-0.68%,-8.26%,-8.31%,-12.05%,+7.33%the 2008/9 flu-season was mild, 7.36% fewer people died from P+I than average.
Then we have a general trend, that fewer dead people are registered in these 122
big cities. That trend did even increase in the flu-weeks 35-51.
But deaths from P+I did increase nevertheless by ~7% during that time.
So when we compare total deaths in the 122 cities with previous years,
we have to account for 1.) reduced reporting since 2009 --> ~5%
2.) fewer people deaths being reported in the cities --> ~3%
8% in total, so multiply reported total deaths by 1.08 to compare with
2007,2006,...
total deaths in USA 1996-2006:
Code:
deaths in USA 1996-2006 in the 5 age groups
as reported (adjusted) from MMWR (urban)
and by the human mortality database (all of USA)
----------------------------------------------------
MMWR:1996, 614388, 412092,116075, 55644,16119,13554,37994
HMD:1996,2314689,1714097,378147,147218,46733,28493
ratio: 376, 415, 325, 264, 289, 210
MMWR:1997, 615684, 420457,115915, 49089,16067,13249,39769
HMD:1997,2314245,1729156,376948,134973,45115,28050
ratio: 375, 411, 325, 274, 280, 211
MMWR:1998, 598748, 411788,113256, 45023,14638,13081,39967
HMD:1998,2337256,1753512,380278,131409,43678,28376
ratio: 390, 425, 335, 291, 298, 216
MMWR:1999, 575421, 398059,109658, 41566,13668,12036,39174
HMD:1999,2391399,1797585,392019,130345,43507,27941
ratio: 415, 451, 357, 313, 318, 232
MMWR:2000, 608756, 418448,117736, 44087,15053,12801,45674
HMD:2000,2403351,1800076,401255,130272,43707,28039
ratio: 394, 430, 340, 295, 290, 219
MMWR:2001, 586491, 400858,115471, 43411,14404,11884,40402
HMD:2001,2416425,1798717,412285,133384,44463,27573
ratio: 412, 448, 357, 307, 308, 232
MMWR:2002, 562574, 382574,113922, 40047,14060,11612,38917
HMD:2002,2443386,1811970,425798,132518,45062,28038
ratio: 434, 473, 373, 330, 320, 241
MMWR:2003, 585358, 393253,121846, 41215,15079,12357,40011
HMD:2003,2448287,1804610,439370,130782,45495,28029
ratio: 418, 458, 360, 317, 301, 226
MMWR:2004, 590182, 396650,126779, 39727,14309,12227,41025
HMD:2004,2397614,1755908,442466,126251,45048,27940
ratio: 406, 442, 349, 317, 314, 228
MMWR:2005, 595415, 397862,130740, 39531,14413,12447,41524
HMD:2005,2448017,1788364,458885,126725,45597,28443
ratio: 411, 449, 350, 320, 316, 228
MMWR:2006, 577099, 382134,129834, 38344,14015,12403,37377
HMD:2006,2426263,1759573,466479,126008,45672,28529
ratio: 420, 460, 359, 328, 325, 230
MMWR:2007,567259,374485,129047,36919,13679,12797,36098
MMWR:2008,601261,399233,137588,37232,13815,13066,42072
MMWR:2009,567212,374595,132988,35074,12711,11623,39130can it be, that there are such big differences in the ratios
for the age-groups ? (old people die rural, young people die urban)
That induces quite some bias into the MMWR statistics
Missouriwatcher
Editor, Senior Moderator
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
P&I for week 6 in select cities:
Fall River, MA 25%
Worcester, MA 20%
Hartford, CT 18%
Canton, OH 18%
Milwaukee, WI 18%
Hawaii went from 20.3% P&I (week 4) to 12%
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
P&I for week 6 in select cities:
Fall River, MA 25%
Worcester, MA 20%
Hartford, CT 18%
Canton, OH 18%
Milwaukee, WI 18%
Hawaii went from 20.3% P&I (week 4) to 12%
adrianmonksfan
Active member
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Thank you gsgs, it will take some time for me to absorb all of your calculations, but it seems to me that the passage above may be misleading. You had previously calculated that the contribution of the 'missing' cities was on average
430,277,92,36,14,14,24
which represents a different percentage depending on which week we want to compare. So I think it's safe to say that the value of 1.08 is useful when comparing full years, not individual weeks. (I would also take issue with the 3% 'discount', since it may reflect a general trend of decline in AC mortality which is factored in the calculation of the baseline of expected deaths, so it depends on whether we are making comparisons about ratios, thresholds, long-term trends. But I do not wish to embark on such a large-scale analysis so I won't take issue with that)
What I would be interested in is some statistical guidance from available data to prospective assessment: are there any epidemics around? Are P&I deaths above the alarm threshold? What is the threshold, by the way?
I think that the course of the pandemic has disturbed, and made unreliable, the baseline of expected deaths for 2010. It is calculated using averages from previous years when flu had a clearly seasonal pattern (and quite possibly it is still the projection onto 2010 of the baseline calculated for 2009). The baseline could have a sinusoidal shape with only one peak each year. Now the summer and autumn waves of the pandemic exceeded the epidemic threshold because the expected ratio (P&I / AC deaths) was low, but at present the baseline is close to its peak value and the signal of a new wave may pass unnoticed. Or, a false positive signal may be generated by some other factor.
Mathematically, the only explanations for the present situation are that AC deaths are lower than in previous years, or P&I deaths are higher, or both. My impression after your calculations is that the relatively low number of AC deaths is more explanatory than the number of P&I deaths. I see this not as an assurance that everything is going fine, but as a difficulty in detecting a possible signal.
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Thank you gsgs, it will take some time for me to absorb all of your calculations, but it seems to me that the passage above may be misleading. You had previously calculated that the contribution of the 'missing' cities was on average
430,277,92,36,14,14,24
which represents a different percentage depending on which week we want to compare. So I think it's safe to say that the value of 1.08 is useful when comparing full years, not individual weeks. (I would also take issue with the 3% 'discount', since it may reflect a general trend of decline in AC mortality which is factored in the calculation of the baseline of expected deaths, so it depends on whether we are making comparisons about ratios, thresholds, long-term trends. But I do not wish to embark on such a large-scale analysis so I won't take issue with that)
What I would be interested in is some statistical guidance from available data to prospective assessment: are there any epidemics around? Are P&I deaths above the alarm threshold? What is the threshold, by the way?
I think that the course of the pandemic has disturbed, and made unreliable, the baseline of expected deaths for 2010. It is calculated using averages from previous years when flu had a clearly seasonal pattern (and quite possibly it is still the projection onto 2010 of the baseline calculated for 2009). The baseline could have a sinusoidal shape with only one peak each year. Now the summer and autumn waves of the pandemic exceeded the epidemic threshold because the expected ratio (P&I / AC deaths) was low, but at present the baseline is close to its peak value and the signal of a new wave may pass unnoticed. Or, a false positive signal may be generated by some other factor.
Mathematically, the only explanations for the present situation are that AC deaths are lower than in previous years, or P&I deaths are higher, or both. My impression after your calculations is that the relatively low number of AC deaths is more explanatory than the number of P&I deaths. I see this not as an assurance that everything is going fine, but as a difficulty in detecting a possible signal.
gsgs
Registered User
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
total=absolute, rest in % of total *1000
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
the total number of deaths increases by ~10000 per year, with the exception
of 2004, where it magically fell by 50000
old people prefer to die rural while the younger go to town for dying
the proportion of people aged 44-65 among the deaths constantly increases
while deaths in the 25-44 group decline
I cannot see any impact of P+I-deaths on total deaths
In 2000 we had ~700 excess-deaths from P+I in the 122 cities
and total deaths in the 122 cities were also ~10000-~20000 higher.
But total deaths in the whole country were normal, so do people
just die urban in P+I-years while else they would have died rural ?
It would be useful to include some rural areas in the statistics to
avoid bias towards big urban areas
2004 mystery:
http://www.endowmentmed.org/index.php?Itemid=13&id=482&option=com_content&task=view
Re: Weekly MMWR - Week 30 2009 - Updated through Week 6 2010
total=absolute, rest in % of total *1000
Code:
total >65 45-64 25-44 1-24 <1 P+I
---------------------------------------------------------------------
MMWR, 1996,614388,67073,18892,9056,2623,2206,6184
MMWR, 1997,615684,68291,18827,7973,2609,2151,6459
MMWR, 1998,598748,68774,18915,7519,2444,2184,6675
MMWR, 1999,575421,69177,19057,7223,2375,2091,6807
MMWR, 2000,608756,68738,19340,7242,2472,2102,7502
MMWR, 2001,586491,68348,19688,7401,2455,2026,6888
MMWR, 2002,562574,68004,20250,7118,2499,2064,6917
MMWR, 2003,585358,67181,20815,7040,2576,2111,6835
MMWR, 2004,590182,67208,21481,6731,2424,2071,6951
MMWR, 2005,595415,66820,21957,6639,2420,2090,6973
MMWR, 2006,577099,66216,22497,6644,2428,2149,6476
MMWR, 2007,567259,66016,22749,6508,2411,2255,6363
MMWR, 2008,601261,66399,22883,6192,2297,2173,6997
MMWR, 2009,567212,66041,23445,6183,2240,2049,6898
HMD, 1996,2314689,74053,16336,6360,2018,1230,3617
HMD, 1997,2314245,74717,16288,5832,1949,1212,3735
HMD, 1998,2337256,75024,16270,5622,1868,1214,3930(480-487)
HMD, 1999,2391399,75168,16392,5450,1819,1168,2664(J10-J18)
HMD, 2000,2403351,74898,16695,5420,1818,1166,2717
HMD, 2001,2416425,74437,17061,5519,1840,1141,2567
HMD, 2002,2443386,74158,17426,5423,1844,1147,2688
HMD, 2003,2448287,73709,17946,5341,1858,1144,2661
HMD, 2004,2397614,73235,18454,5265,1878,1165,2488
HMD, 2005,2448017,73053,18745,5176,1862,1161,2573
HMD, 2006,2426263,72521,19226,5193,1882,1175,2321
HMD, 2007,2423995,72476,19416,5036,1853,1206,2180http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
the total number of deaths increases by ~10000 per year, with the exception
of 2004, where it magically fell by 50000
old people prefer to die rural while the younger go to town for dying
the proportion of people aged 44-65 among the deaths constantly increases
while deaths in the 25-44 group decline
I cannot see any impact of P+I-deaths on total deaths
In 2000 we had ~700 excess-deaths from P+I in the 122 cities
and total deaths in the 122 cities were also ~10000-~20000 higher.
But total deaths in the whole country were normal, so do people
just die urban in P+I-years while else they would have died rural ?
It would be useful to include some rural areas in the statistics to
avoid bias towards big urban areas
2004 mystery:
http://www.endowmentmed.org/index.php?Itemid=13&id=482&option=com_content&task=view