The media might have dropped their all-day, every-day coronavirus death toll counters at the bottom of their screens, but they’re still keeping an eye out for milestones to keep the news cycle going. On Monday, it was estimated that more Americans have died of COVID-19 than died from the 1918 flu pandemic. Didn’t President-elect Biden promise us he was going to shut down the virus if we just wore masks for 100 days?
CNN: More than 675,000 people have died of Covid-19 in the United States, surpassing the country’s estimated death toll from the 1918 flu pandemic.
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) September 20, 2021
Get ready for a lot of "Ackshully, when you adjust for population…." tweets.
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahDispatch) September 20, 2021
And why not?
Which is a valid point.
— Sean Agnew (@seanagnew) September 20, 2021
This seems unfair. Pointing out the discrepancy in population doesn't minimize the covid death toll.
— Noam "MF Blum" (@neontaster) September 20, 2021
When you read @JakeTapper's tweet, look through these photos to get an idea of what the U.S. looked like in 1918, a growing country of just over 100 million people. https://t.co/cHb6b2Xj9B pic.twitter.com/8zinkD5Wf3
— Aldous Huxley's Ghost™ (@AF632) September 20, 2021
That's a good point.
675,000 deaths when the population was 106M would equal 2.1M deaths today.
Granted half of those deaths have been during the Biden administration but hey… nice tweets, right Jonah?
— WheelmanForHire (@WheelmanForHire) September 20, 2021
"You know, I really like Jonah, I'm not sure why so many people on the right dunk on him."
Oh,
Oh, never mind
— CCD (@ConwayCD) September 20, 2021
Speaking as a life actuary, yeah, it does make a big difference when the 1918 population was about 103 million and the current population is about 333 million.
JEEZ
— Mary Pat Campbell (@meepbobeep) September 20, 2021
Recommended
You want to know another big difference?
Young adults were disproportionately killed by the Spanish Flu, unlike with COVID-19, which has an age pattern of death similar to base death rates now.
— Mary Pat Campbell (@meepbobeep) September 20, 2021
It’s not an honest comparison without taking into account the difference in population, though. And you know that.
— License to Will (@wharrison51) September 20, 2021
Is that not a fair thing to mention when you're trying to equate two things?
675,000/300,000,000 = .225%
675,000/100,000,000 = .675%To hit the 1918 number, we'd need to lose 2,000,000.
This doesn't minimize the impact of COVID. But it's not the same as the Spanish Flu.
— NYConservatarian (@NYConservtarian) September 20, 2021
Seems like an important distinction.
— Egon Alter (@AlterEgon75) September 20, 2021
It’s insulting to criticize that very normal thing when comparing two things. And it’s hacky and lazy to tell people they’re insensitive or awful because they’re doing it. Everyone knows it’s been a horrible year. But comparisons are fair to express when using data to shock.
— M Speier (@mspeier1) September 20, 2021
I'm not sure why you act like it's some kind of gotcha. It's quite relevant if you're making a comparison, to know how different the situation is.
— Eggy McEggHead (@honestpolitics1) September 20, 2021
Is that not an important distinction? It seems the implication from Tapper is the two diseases are similar.
— Jake (unaffiliated with State Farm) (@JDSommey) September 20, 2021
Well, context is very relevant, so…
— Will (@willbeckley) September 20, 2021
Well, because it kind of does. 675k deaths in Bhutan is annihilation. 675k deaths in the US (2020 population, over a year and a half) is “a lot.” 675k deaths globally over 18 months is fewer than there are flu deaths on average in any 18 month period.
— Oleg Roslak (@OlegRoslak) September 20, 2021
Statistics. How do they work?
— john x. (@pidgeonlegs) September 20, 2021
That data is critical to check the media because journalism is missing in action these days. Their only goal is ratings and the more fear the better.
— Graf Graferson (@TheRealGRAF) September 20, 2021
They’re not wrong
— j zaura (@jimzaura) September 20, 2021
You don't think that more than 3x more people occupying the same space than makes a difference?
— Jordan Liabenow (@liabenow) September 20, 2021
It matters
— ▏ ▎ ▍ ▌Jeff Lembke (@JeffLembke) September 20, 2021
Why would it be wrong to adjust for population? That seems, dare I say it, more scientific.
— Peter Harrigan (@harrigan_pete) September 20, 2021
The population size difference is a major factor. I am a biomedical statistician, and population size, density and mobility is a major factor that makes those two events almost like comparing apples to lettuce, but that doesn’t fit your desired message.
— Whiskey Told Me To (@MDKing34313331) September 20, 2021
It doesn't matter if the average age of community dwelling adults who die is > 80? I find that is useful to know. Since I have family and friends in real life.
— JohnnyLawrenceMD (@CobraKaiMD) September 20, 2021
Well, an honest conversation would adjust for population.
— Melissa Mackenzie (@MelissaTweets) September 20, 2021
Yes an accurate reflection would adjust for population that was 1/3 what it is today.
— Rob Eno (@Robeno) September 20, 2021
Indeed, one should prepare for people who understand basic math when tweeting in ignorance of basic math.
I suspect you learned this the hard way.
— Eric Spencer (@JustEric) September 20, 2021
And he shouldn’t adjust for population size why, exactly?
I would like to know whose grip is on your, you know. Blink once for The Lincoln Project, twice for someone in this administration.
— #BeThisGuy (@corrcomm) September 20, 2021
We kind of count on our sophisticated media types to provide us with this sort of context since they know everything.
* * *
Update:
Goldberg digs in:
This tweet made a lot of people angry. Putting aside the fact their replies prove I was right, I have no problem with adjusting for population. I have a huge problem w/glibly trying to minimize the death toll. Do you adjust for population every time you talk about war deaths? https://t.co/3noEsAyJ9d
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahDispatch) September 20, 2021
“I have no problem with adjusting for population” while at the same time *preemptively* mocking people adjusting for population.
— Kent Lind (@Air2BDifrent) September 20, 2021
You're right, @JonahDispatch. To avoid minimizing death tolls, let's no longer adjust for population every time we talk about any deaths. How's California doing compared to Wyoming? https://t.co/vbtTnYxuPU
— Aldous Huxley's Ghost™ (@AF632) September 21, 2021
Related:
‘He is turning the damn car around’: MSNBC analyst enjoyed the ‘angry dad vibes’ from President Biden’s coronavirus speech https://t.co/u49OijdZgp
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 9, 2021