U.S. Daily COVID-19 Deaths Dip to Lowest Level Since March 2020

|

On Sunday, the 7-day rolling average (which flattens out differences in reporting by day of week) was 504; Monday's was even lower, 472, but that might have been influenced by the holiday. This is of course still a massive death rate, three times more than even in the worst of recent flu seasons, but the hope is that it will continue to decline.

Source: worldometers.info

NEXT: #MeToo/#TheyLied Among the Communists / "Anti-Fascists" / Left Anarchists

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. 2% of the 1.5 million nursing home residents died this month. Many died from pneumonia. Their pictures on ventilators was kept off the front page in support of Biden by the tech billionaire media. What they did to our country to get rid of Trump and to enrich themselves is unforgivable. Their assets should be seized in civil forfeiture.

      When unlawful judicial review could have helped this nation, the federal courts refused to help hundreds of times. Once again this worthless, toxic profession failed. Bigger mistake than Dred Scot, a catasteophe for the country, as big as the Civil War.

      1. Cuomo touches a couple of ugly feminists, that makes the headlines. He makes COVID presumptive and steals $billions from the feds, and there is nothing in the papers.

  1. I would be interested in who is still dying from covid. The vulnerable have been vaccinated or they have made a choice to roll the dice. The vaccines are as near to 100% effective at keeping people out of the hospital, as you can get. Also therapeutics are more common, and medicos have a much better track record of keeping people alive once the hit the hospital.

    1. Covid has a long “tail”. It’s possible to be sick for weeks in the hospital, then die.

      Moreover, full vaccination wasn’t opened up to all adults until mid-April in some places. Add that to a 28 day time for full protection….you’re looking at mid May.

      1. Not everybody is at high risk. Those co-mordities are well known, and if the states were running the vaccinations to save the most lives, those with co-morbidities would have been vaccinated by the end of January.
        “28 days to full protection” …protection of of what? Infection, or death? The single injection provides good protection from hospitalizations and death. The EU was using the single dose protocol to get more people protected, and then go back with a booster….if the goal is to save lives. But decisions are being made that are not to maximize survival from covid

        1. “Those co-morbidities are well known,”
          Obviously no well enough by you. The only co-morbidity with a high correlation is chronic kidney disease.
          “protection of of what? Infection, or death?”
          If you look at the serology data concerning antibodies, a single shot for a person who was previously infected produces the same anti-body level in 10 days as two shots to a covid naive recipient in 28 days.
          “Distinct antibody and memory B cell responses in SARS-CoV-2 naïve and recovered individuals following mRNA vaccination,” R. R. Goel et al., Sci. Immunol. 10.1126/sciimmunol.abi6950 (2021).

          1. Morbid obesity, and possibly diabetes too. Pls, of course, age.

            1. Actually Bruce the correlation of those potential co-factors is quite low, unless the person also has a badly suppressed immune system.

              1. #1 risk factor—being in a nursing home. That has to do with not only co morbidities but also the fact it is difficult to socially distance with nursing home patients. So people make the mistake of pointing to Florida’s older population as the state seemingly having mediocre numbers…except the elderly in Florida are on average going to be healthy enough to live on their own and not in a multi generational house that would make social distancing difficult. Also Florida and Hawaii have the best weather for outdoor activities and most difficult for the virus to spread. In context Florida’s numbers are terrible…but the lockdowns were very unpopular.

                1. #1 risk factor—being in a nursing home.

                  Adding to Sebastian ‘s comment – the median life expectancy for males upon entering a nursing home is 4 months, the median life expectancy for females is approx 9 months. (note median life expectancy, not average life expectancy)

                  Bottom line, people move into nursing homes to die

                  1. Sad, but it seems to be true.

                2. That is a risk factor but it is not a comorbidity. Moreover, that risk factor does encompass several other factors such as weak immune systems and general poor health that reduce the body’s ability to fight any infection.

            2. I can send you a reference if you are interested.

      2. It is 35 days for “full vaccination” with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, because of the three-week period between the shots.

        Even though full vaccination was opened up in mid-April, some places had supply or distribution problems. Here in northern Virginia, you could get a same-day appointment at a public vaccination center by the end of that week. (Three weeks later, they extended it to 12-year-olds, briefly causing slight congestion between people getting first and second shots — but still with same-day availability.) In contrast, Some of my coworkers from Maryland could not find available shots for a while, and won’t be fully vaccinated for a few more weeks.

        1. For those who have had a covid infection, the time to full immune response is 10 days after a single shot, no second shot is effective in further raising the level of immunity.
          R. R. Goel et al., Sci. Immunol. 10.1126/sciimmunol.abi6950 (2021).

          1. Only for those who had a previous COVID infection.

            SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals required both vaccine doses for optimal increases in antibodies.

        2. All fair points.

    2. Right now the current death rate as reported in the US is 3%. You’re welcome to argue with that figure if you can produce any solid evidence, but that is the number.

      1. Don Nico: The Worldometers data gives it as a bit under 2%, with 610K deaths out of 34M cases; is either the numerator or denominator incorrect here?

        1. EV,
          The Worldometer figure is the average death rate over the course of the pandemic. That number is ~2%. However over the past 90 days, the average daily rate has been 3% and during one month it was actually 4%.
          I don’t have an epidemiological interpretation of those data, but I can tell you the the pandemic average had fallen as low as 1.6% and has risen back to ~2% because of the past 90 days.

          1. I speculate that the higher rates in the past three months MAY be due to infections from the B.117 strain, and the Brazilian strain, both of which are more virulent. BUT I have not seen epidemiological data to support that speculation.

          2. What data source are you using? Are those numbers adjusted for the lag between case diagnosis and deaths? Because the case counts have been dropping, and the number of deaths broadly corresponds to infections a month or more before, it is trickier to get the denominator right when saying “over the past N days”.

            1. I am using day to day tracking from Worldometer, offset by 14 days. If one offsets bt 21 days the results are similar and possible reflect infections by more virulent variants of the original “wild” variety

            2. “it is trickier to get the denominator right when saying “over the past N days”.”
              That is reflected by the noisiness of the data. Without using questionable statistical methods, the variations can been seen in 3 t 7 day averages of the time series.

          3. I think you need to adjust for different countries and relatively higher or lower testing rates.

            Mexico, for example, has a death rate of 9.4%, but they are doing relatively few COVID tests. That means many cases will be missed. You need to compare tests per confirmed case, with death rate by country…

            https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing

            1. “I think you need to adjust for different countries and relatively higher or lower testing rates.”
              1) a study of the characteristics of the times series does not need to make post hoc “corrections” to see changes in pandemic dynamics or the effects of new viral strains
              2) I have done exactly the type of correlation studies that you suggest. As one would expect the pandemic average case fatality rate id negatively correlated (-29%) with the testing rate. However the temporal dynamics are similar despite differences in testing rate. Early daily rates are quite high because of sub-optimal treatment; the daily rates then fall over time reaching asymptotic values b the end of 2020. Rates then claim as more virulent strains break through into the population.

              1. You misunderstand…

                Early in the pandemic, the majority of the reported COVID deaths occurred Europe and the US. Testing was low originally, but then climbed to a high testing rate as capacity increased. Correspondingly, the fatality rate dropped, as you indicate

                However, in the last few months, we have had the majority of deaths move to countries which do not have a high testing rate. India most predominantly, but also Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina. Where the US was testing at 4-5 tests per thousand, at the height of its outbreak, India is currently still at just 1.51 tests per thousand (daily), at that’s even a high. Argentina is only at 0.8 tests per thousand, and Mexico is all the way down at 0.09 tests per thousand.

                What this means is that as COVID moves to less wealthy countries, the apparent death rate is going to rise, when compared to the more wealthy countries, due to the testing disparity.

                1. “Only for those who had a previous COVID infection.”
                  Yup, that is exactly what I said AL.
                  I have also quoted the source material several times in this blog site.

                2. AL,
                  You have to look at the time series on a country by country basis otherwise you are confusing inconsistent information.
                  I always have studied the dynamics on a country by country basis as well as region by region.
                  So your last comment while it could be true globally, is not relevant to what is seen on a national basis

        2. Hi, Eugene. Does that include the guy who crashed his motorcycle and was heard to cough before expiring? All those numbers are 100% fake for the $35000 from Medicare scored by the hospital for putting COVID on his death certificate. Medicare caused this fake epidemic.

        3. Both figures are wrong. The CDC says that over the course of the pandemic 4.3 times as many people have had the covid as there are confirmed cases. Assuming that about 100% of covid fatalities are counted, although it could be higher than 100%, then that would make the death rate ~0.4 percent.

          I’m guessing the reason that the death rate is rising is the people who are dying now caught it a 2 or 3 months ago and have been lingering.

  2. None of the numbers are reliable … COVID death rates have been conflated with other deaths (with COVID vs of COVID), the definition of a COVID case has changed over the pandemic (symptoms, PCR cycle count), and there have been huge financial interests all over the place trying to manipulate numbers.

    1. AtR,
      You are welcome to deceive yourself all you want. The numbers are what they are and are quite consistent (though not identical ) worldwide.

      1. The numbers are high in Commie jurisdictions. All are fake for partisan political fraud. What are you, a child?

        1. Here is a real number. World GDP dropped $4 trillion. That killed 100 million by starvation and its associated medical problems, including suppressong the immune system. Good job lawyers, biggest, quickest mass murder in history.

          1. David,
            Take your meds.

          2. You might as well be arguing with a bot. He accepts all information from the Ministry of Health and Truth unquestioning. And also probably considers himself libertarian. LMFAO

            1. From his posts, it’s clear he reads the papers, not just trusting press releases.

              From where do you get your information, and have every thought why it never seems to disagree with what you wish to be true?

            2. wreck,
              I read journal papers, analyze and compare primary data and perform my own statistical studies (using methods that are very well tested in experimental science.
              You seem to talk off the top of your head.
              The epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 has nothing to do with politics or your ideas thereof.

            3. The info came from the World Food Programme.

      2. The numbers are what they are and are quite consistent (though not identical ) worldwide.

        So long as you’re willing to accept threefold differences between similar neighboring countries as consistent, then sure they are “consistent.”

        Meanwhile Peru has just trebled its death count in a single afternoon, simply by hiring some “international experts” to guess the answer. Probably nothing to do with the fact that there’s a Presidential election on Sunday and the opposition candidate wants to “open up” the economy.

        I think we can all accept that COVID is a very nasty disease, especially for the elderly, without casting aside all capacity for ratonal thought.

        1. Lee,
          You cast a nasty invective without bothering to think that “consistent” can mean consistent dynamic trends even over national statistics with quite different average rates.
          Your comment about Peru in meaningless in a medical sense. It does betray the degree to which politicians of all stripes in the US and in foreign countries have tried to exploit the pandemic.

          1. It does betray the degree to which politicians of all stripes in the US and in foreign countries have tried to exploit the pandemic.

            C’mon you’re nearly there. You can make it ! OK I’ll help you up the last few steps :

            “and thus shows the extreme naivety of looking at COVID statistics from anywhere, with the trusting gaze of a pet bunny rabbit.”

            1. Wow, Lee.
              You are not worth conversing with.
              Your insults are petty like those of an elementary schooler, and your thinking is nil.

              1. Don -“Those co-morbidities are well known,” Obviously no well enough by you- you are welcome to deceive yourself all you want-Take your meds-You cast a nasty invective- Nico :

                “You are not worth conversing with. Your insults are petty like those of an elementary schooler, and your thinking is nil.”

                Medically, this condition is known as a “glass jaw.”

                1. Lee,
                  I think his point was (and I’ll generalize it, to people on any side of any issue): “If you’re an asshole, then others are, on average, less likely to want to engage with you.”

                  1. I think that’s probably right. But I am preternaturallty tolerant and am quite willing to engage with assholes, so long as they appear to have something useful to say, besides the assholery, especially if I don’t have to meet them in person.

                    Anyway, Don is not an asshole, he’s just excitable.

            2. I’m going to steal that last quote. It’s great

        2. He’s willing to accept any difference that hypes the virus, and promotes mandates.

          We’ve been at this for well over a year. There is zero data that correlates and would draw the conclusion that masks and mandates work.

          Cherry pick a few places that correlate but then ignore all of the data that doesn’t agree seems to be the political scientist way.

          If it’s truly a correct hypothesis the data has to match everywhere. That would be NY vs FL vs Sweden vs Peru vs UK

          Gravity works everywhere. But we’re not being scientific we’re being political.

          1. another comment “full of sound and fury and signifying nothing”

  3. At this point … like it is still a problem, yes. But any future preventable deaths from here on out (the word “preventable” being a very important qualifier) can be avoiding if people would just get vaccinated. If they don’t and the they die from covid … they knew full well the risks of that decision.

    I live in a liberal state, and here everyone outdoors isn’t wearing a mask, indoors its like 50-50. Which seems about right, outdoors even if people do have it there is virtually no risk, expecially with vaccines. But imo they ought to get scrap restrictions as soon as possible, under the notion that if you get it at this point, 99% chance thats on you.

    Like my public library still doesn’t let people sit down, still obsessively cleans everything (we have known for 9 months surface cleaning is useless! People who scream follow the science completely ignore it when …), still requires masks, and still has an absurd procedure for checking books out. Its practically unusable, and my tax money funds a library you are not allowed to read in. Its ridiculous and should have stopped months ago.

    1. Vote Democrat, live in hell on earth, even if rich.

    2. There may be some things the politicians and their political scientists (not actual scientists) have cooked up in regards to “saving us” from Covid but I’m having hard time thinking of even one.

      So yes basically everything is stupid. I hope the vaccine is truly as effective as advertised because even that effort was heavily politicized. And if it is as effective as advertised sure seems like those politicians want to hold onto their power doesn’t it.

  4. So, 80% or more of the US population has natural (due to previous infection) or un-natural (due to vaccination) immunity, yet the “death toll” is high. What does this actually say?

    Less importantly, what does Fauci’s new book say this says? What does the agency employing the purported author of Fauci’s new book say this says?

    What does evidence say this says. Does evidence say that disease is a part of the human experience which cannot be avoided? Does evidence say that nothing can meaningfully change that which fate or gods or nature has determined? Does evidence say that man is but a player in the game of universe?

  5. “80% or more of the US population has natural (due to previous infection) or un-natural (due to vaccination) immunity,”
    How do you get that number. The number vaccinated is 135 million; the number of infections is 34 million. Disregarding the 610,000 who have died and the previously infected who have been vaccinated that gives 170 Million, only 50% of Americans, not 80% as you claim.

    1. No doubt, there are people who have been infected but became only mildly ill or were asymptomatic. So, it seems likely that the 34 million figure is low. How low? We have no idea because almost no effort was made to do contact tracing or monitor testing. And, there is only one reason why our testing effort was so impotent — because the more you test, the more cases you find and that doesn’t look good, in the opinion of certain people.

      1. Stella,
        “How low”
        That number has been estimated to be roughly a factor of two. Applying that and making no allowance for double counting, the “Protected” fraction is at most 60% and not 80%

        1. I don’t know who says the estimated disease burden at 2x confirmed cases, the CDC says that number, in the US is 4.3.

          “1 in 4.3 (95% UI* 3.7 – 5.0) total COVID–19 infections were reported”

          1. You might try a thorough search through the literature.
            Your number of 4.3% conflates asymptomatic cases with pre-symptomatic reports

    2. He made it up because it’s generally considered the herd immunity figure and made it up to avoid pushback on his desire to open everything up. The reality is that we’re nowhere close to that figure nationwide even among those 16+.

      Even your calculation assumes that nobody who had Covid got the vaccine. But that’s not the case. The vast majority of people I know who had Covid late got the vaccine anyway, myself included.

      1. David,
        I agree and I noted that I did not count covid-infected who later received the vaccine such as yourself and my mom.
        There is just no way that the “immune” are at more than the ~50% level

        1. Wrong again, first of all the latest studies shows long lasting natural immunity after covid infection, second if you combine the estimated 146 million that have been infected (see CDC Estimated Covid-19 Burden) with the 168M with one 1 dose (Britain’s First Shot First strategy has shown that one shot is very effective in conferring immunity), we are very likely at least at 70% immunity.

          And the daily new case rates show that.

          1. Kazinski,
            “Wrong again, first of all the latest studies shows long lasting natural immunity after covid infection, ”
            No. you are wrong again. Look at the literature. R. R. Goel et al., Sci. Immunol. 10.1126/sciimmunol.abi6950 (2021).
            Don’t double count the vaccinated covid infected. Don’t count the 611K dead
            When people play so fast and loose with the numbers as you do, I don’t trust their motives in exaggeration and distortion

            1. Well a few weeks ago, we surprisingly came to agreement that when our case rates hit what Israel’s were in late March then we would be at herd immunity.

              Well we are there. And our numbers are still dropping at a rapid rate, more rapidly than Israel’s in late March.

  6. The data has been so politically manipulated that I don’t think you can correct it. “Of Covid vs with Covid” blatantly stated by our officials from the Ministry of Health is one sign the data is false.

    Another bad sign is that our Ministry of Truth has been declaring all contrary opinions as false misleading and dangerous and thus aggressively censors free speech.

    Another bad sign is that Covid has miraculously cured the common flu. Sure thing.

    I’m thinking if you can get your hands on uncorrupted data excess deaths is the best guess of how bad Covid really was.

    And once you get that information, if the result is not that bad see if you can actually publish it.

    1. “I’m thinking if you can get your hands on uncorrupted data excess deaths is the best guess of how bad Covid really was. ”

      The data on “excess deaths” is so noisy (and all over the map) that you should not make any conclusions from it.

      “Another bad sign is that Covid has miraculously cured the common flu. Sure thing.”
      Sometimes we actually do get lucky. Of course that your word “cured” has no scientific validity whatsoever. It is just your rhetorical device. Having said that, I can tell you that we are also lucky that people who described SARS-CoV-2 as a “super-flu” are dead wrong. Influenza has far stronger and more numerous co-morbidities correlated with death from COVID-19.

      If you’d like put ±10% error bars on all covid-19 numbers, the epidemiological and physiological conclusions would not change.

      1. We have not cured the flu but my local data seems to indicate we have.

        Thus it makes me suspicious that those who desire the power of mandates and those that benefit economically from them will spin it any away that keeps it going.

        But not you I guess.

        Covid is a flu. And the ONLY thing its followed has been the flue seasonal highs and lows. That’s because it is a flu.

        1. So the secret data we are not being allowed to see see agrees with what you want to be true.

          Your argument seems unfalsifiable.

        2. “my local data seems to indicate we have”
          No, your local data show that the flu infection rate this year is low. This year’s flu was neither highly infectious nor was it virulent.
          Your politics has cured nothing

  7. Since this is a legal blog, what are the prospects that we can get our alleged inalienable rights back? We all know since all the smart legal folks and judges have told us there is indeed an invisible ink clause in the constitution that says you can suspend the constitution if there is a virus.

    I’m just wondering since it seems like the virus is not so much of an emergency anymore and we all also know based on history that once government seizes power they always give it back voluntarily. When that will be? LOL

    On another subject professor, when are we going to see an article on the legal treatment of the mostly peaceful Jan 6 protestors as compared top the many mostly peaceful protests that burned and looted and committed acts of violence all last year?

    Seems like a good legal subject don’t you think?

    1. I’m just wondering since it seems like the virus is not so much of an emergency anymore and we all also know based on history that once government seizes power they always give it back voluntarily. When that will be? LOL

      There’s a GOP candidate for governor of NJ who is advertising that he will end (Democratic) Governor Murphy’s lockdowns.

      Apparently you, like he, haven’t noticed that the restrictions are all virtually ending or ended already.

      1. “Virtually ended”? Which means not ended

        Why type dumb stuff like that on a libertarian site? Are the inalienable rights alienable when one person says so? And for how long? And what constitutes the threshold for such a decision.

        And apparently that same person gets to determine that threshold. Yea that’s checks and balances for ya

        1. I’m not certain that when Thomas Jefferson wrote the DoI he was thinking of shopping without a mask as one of the rights endowed by our creator.

    2. “On another subject professor, ”
      Not here, not now. Keep changing the subject.

  8. Those that wish to look at the data independently, not filtered through the media or the politicos, should follow @ianmSC on twitter.

    He also writes for Substack. As I’ve previously stated mask on/mask/off and also locked down/open the data has to show that these measure have a clear affect on the trajectory of the disease. And it has to pretty much correlate everywhere.

    It doesn’t. Therefore the hypothesis is false.

    It also brings up a legal question of whether this is really a valid emergency and whether it warrants the suspension of rights.

    The US constitution doesn’t have such a suspension provision. I don’t think the founders forgot to add one.

    But I always hear the US constitution is supreme, For example 14A and gay marriage. Wouldn’t 1A be just as supreme?

    1. Twitter? Now there is an authoritative source.
      Is Nature immunology too trying for a little brain?

      1. Aren’t you the guy complaining about insults in a post above? Why not answer the very reasonable point above about the complete lack of real world evidence that masks and lock downs were effective (let alone legal).

        1. I do complain when people quote no authoritative source.

          Twitter is a source of noise in the system not information.
          I was not talking about the effectiveness of masks and lockdowns. And I have no intention in engaging in a highly politically charged shouting match, especially not with someone who considers Twitter an expert source.

          Moreover, wreck make no quantitative point. He just repeats his ideological preconceptions. Answering him is a waste of time.

        2. But if you want a quantitative comparison when there were no vaccinations:
          Last August 30, the Swedish CFR was 6.9% (no lockdown), while Norway’s was 2.5% with a lockdown.
          Mexico was 10.8%.
          By November 20, Sweden’s rate with a voluntary lockdown was 3.2% with 19860 cases per million while Norway was down to 1.0% with 5696 cases per million.
          Brazil with no lockdown had 27926 cases per million. Its CFR was 2.8%.
          By Dec 30. By November 20, Sweden’s rate with a voluntary lockdown was 2.0% with 43174 cases per million while Norway was down to 0.9% with 8937 cases per million.
          Do you need more numbers?

          1. Ha ha pick those cherries

            Now do FL vs NY

            Now do Sweden vs UK

            To be “science “ it has to work everywhere

            Also when you accede you authority is one of them Fauci. The clown show may be ending

            1. You never can stand the facts wreck. Buzz off

            2. “Also when you accede you authority is one of them Fauci. ”
              1) Study English syntax.
              2) Your charge is false.

        3. He’s pretty invested.

    2. The US constitution doesn’t have such a suspension provision.

      Judges don’t care. We’ve seen that since the pandemic started. When the news media fear machine is at maximum, judges are ok with suspending more-or-less anything “temporarily”.

      They’ll also accept magical thinking as “rational basis”.

  9. “To be “science “ it has to work everywhere ”

    For the UK in sept 30 – 8.8% 10138 cases per million
    Nov 20, 3.7% and 21364 cases per million
    On Dec 30 3.0% and 35745 per million.
    All much worse than Norway with a strict lockdown.

    You don’t want the truth. You can’t stand the truth.
    You also have no idea what science is.

Please to post comments