View Single Post
  #351  
Old 01-31-2018, 05:32 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 84,617
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twig93 View Post
Mary Pat, from your reading on this topic, do you have a sense of the age range at which this year's flu is most lethal? (Or anyone else more educated than me on this topic.)

My understanding is that flu usually targets the very young and very old, but the 1919 pandemic was somewhat unique in that it was largely working-age adults that were dying from it.

Just curious how this year's more-lethal-than-normal strain compared.
I just pulled the CDC data from here:
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html

Note that they combine flu & pneumonia deaths in there.

Their thresholds are against a curve on percentage of deaths due to these causes in total.

Select the "<18" from the age selector on the far right, and you'll see pediatric deaths are a bit low (I downloaded the underlying data, btw, and keep in mind that the data are not necessarily fully developed for the last weeks on that graph) -- part of the issue, of course, is that so few children die in the first place, so this is an extremely noisy curve.

There are two other age ranges -- it's bad for 18-64, but it's really bad for 65+.

There's also a powerpoint deck here:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weekl.../FluView03.ppt

(The template is awful..you have to see it for yourself)

Anyway, pediatric deaths make the news the most, because it's so rare.

The numbers through the first week of 2018, for the 2017-2018 flu season:

pediatric deaths: 21 from flu, 119 from pneumonia
18-64: 351 from flu, 7,358 from pneumonia
65+: 1695 from flu, 34,571 from pneumonia

Obviously, not all the pneumonia deaths are flu-driven.
__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.11533 seconds with 9 queries