NedNotes (not blog): COVIData sweep for 04dec20; supplement to family cluster analysis

Honouring five American citizens felled by this vicious virus. Three men two women; a couple of 68 years marriage; one Black; one Asian; one Muslim Indian; an R.N., an Audubon Society leader, a pediatrician; two immigrants from Japan, India; average age of eighty and median of seventy-eight; from Concord, Massachusetts to Mount Rainier. 😷🙏💔

B.L.U.F. (bottom-line, up front): data supplement to the “Letter #158-B to Friends and Familiares” issued yesterday with a few comments. The coronavirus contagion is coming home for Christmas.

INTRODUCTION
Since this data sweep serves as an information supplement with very little research, this week provides an opportunity to clean up the presentation through the following changes. For informational purposes, this text will follow the second table on thirty-eight states and five territories in subsequent weeks. For comprehensive explanations on methodology and purpose, please revert to Appendix I. 

1st, the two averages of weekly growth rates for the ten bellwether states are clarified in the Appendix. Essentially, the geometric or compound average growth rate is a smoothed average that allows for growth-on-growth increases (i.e., similar to compounding interest). The time weighted weekly averages are a trend-weighted average of each week's particular growth rates. While the compound rate is theoretically more defensible, comparing the two averages gives one a sense of more recent trends and volatilities.

2nd, in the 38+ table (of thirty-eight states and five territories), the risk classifications  -- of very low; low; moderate; high; and, very high -- remain the same. The parameters, however, are loosened to reflect nine months of experience. The new parameters center upon the first year base case fatality level of 335,301 souls that I forecast eight months ago, together with the updated projection from the University of Washington of 470,974 deaths. On 04dec20, the old and new parameters are also applied to facilitate  transition.

3rd,changes in how positivity rates are presented in the 38+ now align the data with the original intention behind presenting them. The intent here is to show whether positivity is trending up or down and to what degree. The parameters are loosened to match the practical reporting constraints and data lags facing most states. 

States with changed positivity rates of less than 10% up (i.e., worsening) or down (i.e., improving) are deemed unchanged and the information unformatted (i.e., appearing in plain black font). The formatting differentiates deteriorations from improvements in the color of the font between 10-20%. Bold fonts indicate material deteriorations or improvements of more than 20%. 

Keep in mind that these percentage changes are based on percentages; percentage changes of percentages can attenuate the utility of data.

4th, a refresher on the assessment of a state’s testing capacity, again on the 38+ table. The data pivot off of the tests per million people expressed as a percentage. The symbology uses hand gestures to assessment the degree of testing capability and commitment relative to the national average for the week under review. Colors indicate whether testing is declining (red font) or improving (blue font) when a states results place its commitment to a new category of, specifically:

• 👎👎 meaning a state's testing level materially below the concurrent national benchmark (i.e., > 15 percentage points below);
• 👎 meaning a state's testing is noticeably below the weekly national average (i.e., 5-15 points below;
• 👈 meaning a state's testing activity is slightly lower than average (i.e., < 5 points below);
• 👉👈 meaning a state's testing level is basically equal to that of the nation;
• 👉 meaning a state's testing level is < 5 percentage points above the benchmark;
• 👍 meaning a state's testing activity is 10-15 points above the weekly national level; and,
• 👍👍 meaning a state's testing commitment is > 15 points above the concurrent average.

DATA REVIEW
The full effects of Thanksgiving travelling and indoor events suitable for the COVID community spread will not be felt for another week to ten days. The week witnessed rapidly increasing positivity rates (i.e., the percentage of people testing positive for having the virus either through full-blown COVID, a current asymptomatic infection, or a previous infection leaving anti-bodies). The initial deliveries of vaccines should start arriving in later December, capable of inoculating up to 4% of the elderly, or 1-2% net of their care-givers and medical first responders.

From the Bellwether States Table (above)
A review of the bellwether table indicates the stress facing the five newer states, particularly break-out states Wisconsin (i.e., deaths up 180% since October 2nd when the coronavirus contagion seeped into rural areas in the Midwest and West); Idaho (i.e., deaths up 116% in two months); as well as as Missouri (i.e., deaths up 196% in nine weeks). Their positivity rates range from 16-51% and none has a decent testing apparatus in place.

On the bellwether table, Illinois, Colorado, and Oklahoma are struggling with spikes in fatalities with the numbers of deaths increasing by 53-77% over the same period. Though positivity rates are high, they are not like the first three states mentioned; only Illinois has an adequate testing protocol established and it is superior.

The more established states of Arizona, California, Florida, and Texas have seen lower rates. Arizona and California are doing a better job this week as their death tolls have increased by 20% during the first two months of the second wave of Autumn 2020 and Winter 2021. 

Nevertheless California is acting preemptively to mitigate the second wave, though Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom is in danger of micro-managing the response into stiff public resistance. For her part, Arizona is tweaking policies but stepping up enforcement to manage the second wave before it elevates out of control.

Florida and Texas are seeing higher 30-40% surges and beg questions of data integrity from states like Florida and about the adequacy of mitigating measures in Texas.

From the 38+ Table of 38 States and Five Territories (below)
What a difference one week makes. Last week twenty-three states had improving positivity rates. Despite relaxed parameters explained above and in Appendix-I, only three states showed definite improvements; twenty-two states reversed positivity trends. 

Only four states, two included on the 38+ table -- New York and tiny Vermont -- and the off-chart baby sibs of Hawaii and Maine have sustained positivity rates below the threshold of 5% for two weeks established by the World Health Organization. Trending quickly upward to 4.7% since last Friday, New York will likely fall off that honor roll over the next week

The following states have posted double-digit growth rates in the number of fatalities during past week:

1. South Dakota (20% increase; population of 0.9 million; 47% positivity rate);
2. Idaho (13.6% increase; 1.8 million people; 51% positivity rate);
3. New México (13.4% increase; 2.1 million; 13% positivity rate);
4. Iowa (13.3% increase; 3.2 million; 41% positivity rate);
5. Oregon (13.2% increase; 4.2 million; 10% positivity rate);
6. Colorado (12.2% increase; 5.8 million; 10% positivity rate);
7. Wisconsin (11.8% increase; 5.8 million; 16% positivity rate);
8. Missouri (11.0% increase; 6.1 million; 19% positivity rate);
9. Minnesota (11.0% increase; 5.4 million; 11% positivity rate); as well as,
10. Kentucky (10% increase; 4.5 million; 13% positivity rate).

Among other states with higher growth rates in mortality, the ones of concern are Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Indiana, Colorado, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia.

The following states ought to be followed closely:

• The Dakotas with normalized death tolls already in the 400-500,000 range with lackadasical to absent testing commitments and positivity rates through the roof;
• Iowa, likely together with Nebraska and Kansas, with a 13% growth in deaths over the last week and 40%+ positivity rates indicating no slowing soon;
• Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Michigan since these states are hitting a second wave and have vulnerable populations of minorities and elderly. 

The last three states mentioned alone represent more than 10% of the population and jointly have a relative fatality level similar to the projected base case death toll for the whole, country forecasted in April. They have a blended positivity rate approaching 20%. Governors Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) of and J.B. Pritzker (D-IL) appear to have a better command of their states than does Governor Thomas Wolf (D-PA), at least from afar and for now.

Of the three, however, Pennsylvania is by far the most vulnerable with a 33% positivity rate and a delinquent testing régime. What makes Pennsylvania so worrisome is that the second wave is hitting not only rural counties, as expected, but also Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.