Something strange is happening demographically-speaking
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:30:44 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Something strange is happening demographically-speaking
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Something strange is happening demographically-speaking  (Read 6945 times)
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 29, 2015, 12:21:03 PM »

Must be those pesky refugees, eh?

On a serious note, perhaps it has something to do with babyboomers or their parents reaching dying age?

Or climate change?
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 29, 2015, 01:06:03 PM »

Must be those pesky refugees, eh?

On a serious note, perhaps it has something to do with babyboomers or their parents reaching dying age?

Or climate change?
Climate change most definitely not.  The deaths are spread out all over and the weather was not particularly anything. 

Climate change would only be the culprit if there was a direct, but steady rise in deaths due to specific, but long term changes like rising temperatures or rising or falling precipitation.

The baby boomer argument is also thrown out because not all of the countries we currently have data for had a baby boom during or immediately after WWII.  Germany's boom was in the 30s with a big drop in births during the war that reached its nadir in 1945/46 followed by a steady rise in births until 1963.  This was different than France which had very low birth rates during the 30s and 40s until 1946 when there was a big boom.

And the trend of increasing elderly people is apparent by the rise in the seasonal low of deaths that occurs in September which seems not to be affected by what caused this spike.  In france, September deaths have steadily increased for several years now as the oldest baby boomers reach 70.

The spike this year has to do with February and March being particularly deadly while January saw a numerical increase in line with 2010-2013.  Early 2014 was particularly NOT deadly.  It was the lowest since 2006 and 2007.

So we know this:  At least in France and Hungary... deaths were particularly high in February and March (France saw 23% more deaths in Feb 2015 compared to Feb 2014).  Otherwise deaths have been a couple percent higher than 2014 overall.

This would suggest whatever kills people in late winter was particularly weak in 2014 and particularly strong in 2015.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 30, 2015, 01:39:23 AM »

The baby boomer argument is also thrown out because not all of the countries we currently have data for had a baby boom during or immediately after WWII.  Germany's boom was in the 30s with a big drop in births during the war that reached its nadir in 1945/46 followed by a steady rise in births until 1963.  This was different than France which had very low birth rates during the 30s and 40s until 1946 when there was a big boom.
You need to look at the older age groups.

There are more 79-year-olds than newborns in Germany. Between 2010 and 2015 there was a 31% increase in those 75-79, as the pre-WWII baby boom replaced those born during the deep depression. By 2020, this group will have dropped by 11% as those born during WWII enter that age. It won't reach the the same numbers until 2034 when those born in the late 1950s enter that group.

Meanwhile the number 80-84 will increase by 33% by 2020.

There was also a big differential between those born during WWI and those immediately after, though the overall effect is diminished as these boomers are now over 90. The number 90-94 increased by 58% between 2010 and 2015. The number 95-99 has increased 43% in two years from 2014 to 2016.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2015, 02:36:14 AM »

The baby boomer argument is also thrown out because not all of the countries we currently have data for had a baby boom during or immediately after WWII.  Germany's boom was in the 30s with a big drop in births during the war that reached its nadir in 1945/46 followed by a steady rise in births until 1963.  This was different than France which had very low birth rates during the 30s and 40s until 1946 when there was a big boom.
You need to look at the older age groups.

There are more 79-year-olds than newborns in Germany. Between 2010 and 2015 there was a 31% increase in those 75-79, as the pre-WWII baby boom replaced those born during the deep depression. By 2020, this group will have dropped by 11% as those born during WWII enter that age. It won't reach the the same numbers until 2034 when those born in the late 1950s enter that group.

Meanwhile the number 80-84 will increase by 33% by 2020.

There was also a big differential between those born during WWI and those immediately after, though the overall effect is diminished as these boomers are now over 90. The number 90-94 increased by 58% between 2010 and 2015. The number 95-99 has increased 43% in two years from 2014 to 2016.
Like I said, I'm well aware of the age structure of European countries.  I'm a nerd.

But I haven't even looked at Germany's data.  I looked at France and Hungary.  France's birth rate declined throughout the 19th century and was already the lowest in the world by the turn of the 20th century with births generally declining each year and the population stagnating.

WWI was a huge hit to France and its aged population while younger Germany surged upward played a big role in how France did in the World Wars.

But my point is that France saw declining total births from 1900-1945.. falling from 917,000 in 1901 to 800,000 by 1911-13.  The post WWI "boom" was only 838,000 in 1920 but then births fell to 700,000 by about 1932/33 and further to 600,000 at the onset of the war.  They fell as low as 520,000 in 1941 before climbing during the rest of the war to 645,000 in 1945... but then the boom came and births jumped to 800,000+ and as high as 880,000 from 1946-1974.  Since 1975 they have generally been between 750,000-800,000 with a brief fall to as low as 710,000 in the early '90s.

So French mortality should be rising only very slowly for a few more years before the older baby boomers begin to push it up.  And yes I know how morbid this conversation sounds.

Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2015, 05:33:11 AM »

But I haven't even looked at Germany's data.  I looked at France and Hungary.  France's birth rate declined throughout the 19th century and was already the lowest in the world by the turn of the 20th century with births generally declining each year and the population stagnating.

WWI was a huge hit to France and its aged population while younger Germany surged upward played a big role in how France did in the World Wars.

But my point is that France saw declining total births from 1900-1945.. falling from 917,000 in 1901 to 800,000 by 1911-13.  The post WWI "boom" was only 838,000 in 1920 but then births fell to 700,000 by about 1932/33 and further to 600,000 at the onset of the war.  They fell as low as 520,000 in 1941 before climbing during the rest of the war to 645,000 in 1945... but then the boom came and births jumped to 800,000+ and as high as 880,000 from 1946-1974.  Since 1975 they have generally been between 750,000-800,000 with a brief fall to as low as 710,000 in the early '90s.

So French mortality should be rising only very slowly for a few more years before the older baby boomers begin to push it up.  And yes I know how morbid this conversation sounds.
International Data Base

Pick France; 1990-2020 by increments of 5; 5-year older cohorts.

We can assume relatively little migration for these age groups, and no births, so we can measure the number of deaths for a given 5-year cohort over a 5-year period.

The number of deaths among those 65+ over the previous 5 year period was steady from 1990 to 2010, when it jumped significantly by 2015 and 2020:

1995: 2161K elderly deaths.
2000: 2137K elderly deaths.
2005: 2158K elderly deaths.
2010: 2142K elderly deaths.
2015: 2406K elderly deaths.
2020: 2662K elderly deaths.

Of the increase between 2010 and 2015:

56K was due to aging boomers going from 60-64 in 2010, to 65-69 in 2015.
-17K was due those born between 1925 and 1944.
251K was due to those born between 1920 and 1924, replacing those born between 1915 and 1920.
-26K was due to those born before 1920.

Of the increase between 2015 and 2020:

74K due to aging boomers who will be reaching 75.
+26K due to those born between 1925 and 1944.
161K due to those born between 1920 and 1924 replacing those born between 1915 and 1920.
-5K was due to those born before 1920.

There have been drops in age-based death rates, due to improving heath conditions. Among those who were 60-64 in 1990, 6.4% died by 1995. Among those 60-64 in 2015, 4.1% will die by 2020. There were roughly 3 million such persons in 1990 and 4 million in 2015, but total deaths declined.

Among those 85-90 in 1990, 56.0% died by 1995. Among those 85-90 in 2015, 47% will have died by 2015.

But if we compare relative rates:

4.1% / 6.4% = 36% decline.
47.0% / 56.0% = 16% decline.

2015: Boomers 60-69 are 6.1 as numerous as those born between 1920 and 1925. The number of deaths will be almost equal.

Those born during and before WWI are almost gone but not quite.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2015, 04:29:30 PM »

You're not taking into account that those born in 1920-24 would have had higher death rates their whole lives compared to those born 1945-49.  Also you don't take into account that many more migrants to France were born 1945-49 compared to 1920-24.

Higher infant/child mortality and out-migration explain why Germany could have as many as 2 million births in the years from 1900-1914 without deaths ever rising above 1 million after WWI (except 1945/46 at 1.2 and 1 million respectively).  Though deaths will rise above 1 million in Germany in the coming years.

The significant excess either left Germany or died young.

And again... even with the complex mechanics of momentum and vital statistics, it doesn't explain the pattern that has led to these unusually high increase in deaths.

In France, at least, most of the increase occurred in January-March compared to 2014.  Especially in February and March.  As I cited before... a 23% increase in deaths in Feb 2015 compared to Feb 2014.  Neither were leap years so the month length is the same.

My hypothesis is that it had to do with flu or other seasonal disease and perhaps the fact that seasonal causes of death are stronger than the simple annual cycle (as in.. it's more likely that if you survive winter... you'll survive until the next winter, rather than croak in summer.. all else being equal)

So 2015 was merely a case of a dearth of deaths in 2014 being at least partially corrected in 2015.

This hypothesis would mean that the oldest elderly or vulnerable would have seen the highest increase year over year in mid-late winter.  But I can't find breakdowns for that.


Logged
Gunnar Larsson
Rookie
**
Posts: 150
Sweden


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2015, 06:52:24 PM »

... during the first half of 2015 (at least in some European countries).

Deaths are up by 4-11% in several countries.

In Italy, France and Germany they are up by 10% compared with the first half of 2014, in Austria by 8% and in Sweden by 4%.

Usually, birth and death statistics are not moving by more than 2-3% each year.

What could be the reason for this massive spike in deaths accross the continent ? It's not like it was really cold or something in the winter/spring months ...

Any source?

I looked at the Swedish numbers (http://scb.se/sv_/Hitta-statistik/Statistik-efter-amne/Befolkning/Befolkningens-sammansattning/Befolkningsstatistik/25788/25795/Manadsstatistik---Riket/25896/). It is not really the case that 2015 stands out. If anything it is the number of deaths in 2014 that are a bit lower than the years before and after; in 2012, 2013 and 2015 the number of deaths January-August were all 61,000-something.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2015, 10:35:08 PM »

You're not taking into account that those born in 1920-24 would have had higher death rates their whole lives compared to those born 1945-49.  Also you don't take into account that many more migrants to France were born 1945-49 compared to 1920-24.
These don't matter for my methodology.

If someone born in 1923 in Algeria (or born in France and moved to Algeria) and then repatriated to France after Algerian independence, was living in France in 2010 (87 years old), then by 2015 he would either be dead or be living in France in 2015 as a 92-year old. Emigrants at that age are rare. It doesn't matter that most of his fellow Frenchmen born in 1923 were dead by 2010. We're only looking at the number of people in his age group who died over a 5-year period.

If someone was born in 1946 and 64 YO in 2010 and living in France, then by 2015 they would be 69 YO and living in France, or dead. There would be a little migration. An earlier immigrant's widowed mother moves from Mali to live with her son. Or a retired immigrant moves back to Algeria to live off their petition. But if they had been in France for 40 years, and their children and grandchildren live in France, they may be inclined to stay.

I will make a spreadsheet to show what I am saying.
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: November 04, 2015, 02:47:49 AM »

Apparently, mortality was up 33% in England and Wales during January.

"Experts say flu could be the driving force, although the precise causes will not be known for some time. Prof John Newton, chief knowledge officer at Public Health England (PHE), which monitors death rates, said there had been a substantial increase in the numbers since Christmas. Although it was less apparent from the raw data, PHE's own analysis has found that - even taking the season into account - deaths among elderly people have now been significantly elevated for six weeks. The death rate has risen by 3,700 people a week since early December. Of that more than 3,000 are accounted for by over-75s. The usual key causes of excess winter deaths are cold weather, influenza and gastrointestinal infection."

Here's a BBC article, Death rate up by a third in January: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-31124320
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,613


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2015, 02:49:26 AM »

In the US, white males 45-54 without a college degree have been dying off at increased rates. They say it's mostly because of increased suicide and drug and alcohol abuse.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-group-of-middle-aged-american-whites-is-dying-at-a-startling-rate/2015/11/02/47a63098-8172-11e5-8ba6-cec48b74b2a7_story.html
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: November 04, 2015, 10:23:47 PM »

Yeah, I saw that too.  I'm sure those are the main cause but I'd say increased obesity is the background cause that is increasing deaths in all those categories (probably including suicide tbh)

Fat and sick and nearly dead...
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: November 08, 2015, 02:13:21 AM »

You're not taking into account that those born in 1920-24 would have had higher death rates their whole lives compared to those born 1945-49.  Also you don't take into account that many more migrants to France were born 1945-49 compared to 1920-24.

France population spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet covers 1990 to 2020, with the population by one year age groups, except for 5-year groups for 85-89; 90-94; and 95-99; and unlimited for 100+.

The groups born in WWI and WWII are indicated in red. Those born between 1890-1900 who would have born the brunt of WWI are indicated in grey.

For each year, the population is in the first column, the second column is the difference between persons who are age N in year Y, and who were N-1 in Y-1. The difference represents net migration minus deaths.

Under 40 you are seeing in-migration. Past 40 you are mostly seeing deaths, unless there is some net out-migration.

For the 5-year age groups, the difference column compares the group vs. the same group five years earlier when they were 5 years younger, and divides by 25 (5-year group over five years) to calculate an average per year for a one-year group. This makes the number for the 85-89 group somewhat comparable to that for 84 one-year group. It does spread some deaths around but is OK for seeing trends.

In the first column for each year, in Row 92 is the mean age, which increased at relentlessly even pace over the 30 years, as a remarkably steady number of births has occurred since WWII (a period of 45 years by 1990, now extended to 75 years by 1990).

In the second column for each year, there is the estimate number of deaths for those over 40 (actually the net change in population), the mean age of death, number of deaths by five-year groups 50 or over, and deaths from 50-79, and 80+.  The important thing to not is that the most deaths occur in the 80s.

In France, the drop in births was much greater during WWI, as potential fathers were being slaughtered. The drop in births was less during WWI since France was largely out of the fighting early, and there had been a decline since the early 30s due to the depression.

The drops during the world wars is easier to see when looking horizontally, as opposed to vertically. When you look vertically, you are comparing persons of different ages in the same year. But larger numbers of older persons have died.

For example, in 1990, there were more people living who were 66 (born in 1924) than were 49 (born in 1941, the WWII minimum). By 2000, when they were 76 and 59, those born in 1941 were 18% more numerous.

In 2005, when they were 64 and 81, those born in 1941 were 38% more numerous, and the older generation was dying off much faster (about 16,000 per year vs. 4,000 per year). By 2008, when they 67 and 84, the younger group was 62% larger. By 2019, the 1941 generation, now 78, will be twice as numerous as the five-year cohort born from 1920 to 1924 (95-99). And the older group will still be dying in higher numbers.

When you look horizontally, you are comparing persons of the same age, in different years. Increases in life expectancy will favor those born at later date, but the increase is measured in fractions of a year of longevity.

For example, in 2000, 1.8% of 70 YO died in the previous year. But 4.9% of those who were 80 died. But if we look at 2010, 1.2% of those who were 70 YO had died.

Both your birth year and age have an effect on your chances of dying, but age is much more significant.

If we look at 76 YO in 1990, who were born in 1914, there 376K. By 1993, this number had dipped to 210K (born in 1917), and by 1996 had rebounded to 367K, and by 1997 (born in 1921) was 452K The number of births in 1917 was about 40% less than the number in 1914 or 1920. Comparing those born in 1917 to those born in 1921 there was a 115% uptick.

If we compare those born in 1941, the low year during WWII, to 1948 the peak year of the baby boom the increase was only 62%. Births had been slowly declining from 1931 onward, likely due to the depression, plus the low numbers from WWI reaching adulthood and parenting age.

WWI was a chasm. WWII was a swale with a small bluff on the post-war side.

From 1995 to 2000 the number of deaths increased slightly from 518K to 527K, and then dropped to 495K by 2007, as the smaller WWI generation passed through their 80's (80-84 in 2000, 87-91 in 2007).

Since 2007 deaths have been increasing and will reach 610K by 2020. The rate of increase was somewhat slow at first, and then reached a peak and has begun to decline. The initial increase was almost entirely due to the post-WWI group reaching their 80s and 90s, and replacing those born in WWI. By 2020, the WWI group will be over 100 and the post-WWI group in their late 90s. With only 200K left of those born from after WWI there won't be much increase from them, so the increase in deaths will slow.

There will be a small increase as the early baby-boomers replace those born in the Depression and WWII, but this won't begin to show up until after 2025.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: December 03, 2015, 10:57:19 AM »

Now updated with US numbers:

Deaths were up by 5% in the 1st quarter of 2015 compared with Q1, 2014.

It slowed down to +2% in the 2nd quarter though, which is in line with other countries.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/vsrr/mortality-dashboard.htm
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2016, 01:43:53 AM »

New York State had an abnormally high increase in deaths between Jan.-June 2015:

1st half of 2015: 104.510 deaths

1st half of 2014:   75.763 deaths

That's an increase of 38% (!!!) - Even Germany had "only" an increase of 10%.

All other states had way more moderate increases of 1-10%, which is in line with the European data I posted above.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/provisional_tables/Provisional_Table02_2015Jun.pdf
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: May 12, 2016, 05:03:12 AM »

New York State had an abnormally high increase in deaths between Jan.-June 2015:

1st half of 2015: 104.510 deaths

1st half of 2014:   75.763 deaths

That's an increase of 38% (!!!) - Even Germany had "only" an increase of 10%.

All other states had way more moderate increases of 1-10%, which is in line with the European data I posted above.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/provisional_tables/Provisional_Table02_2015Jun.pdf
If you check the monthly results here:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nvsr/monthly_provisional_notice.htm

You will see that there was a major step in January 2015.

Compared to the same month, previous year the increase beginning in January 2015 was 44%, 41%, 37%, 34%, 36%, 35%.

The number of deaths had been declining in New York from say 1996 to 2006 likely due to a continuing decline in the death rate, and baby boomers not yet reaching the high death ages (80+)

from 2004 to 2013 the number of deaths was fairly stable (from between 146,432 and 152,681), this is only a 4.3% variation, minimum to maximum.

It is possible that this is a very shallow valley as an aging population is catching up with a declining age-dependent death rate (eg the death rate for 80 YO in 2013, is lower than for 80 YO in 2003, but a larger share of the population is 80 in 2013). The peak years were on the end (2004, 2005, and 2013), the mnimums were in 2009 and 2010.

2014 was less deadly than 2013, particularly in the beginning of the year. January 2013 was particularly deadly. Even though January 2014 had the most deaths of any month in 2014, it was down 11% from January 2013. I suspect you will find that January 2013 was colder or there was an influenza uptick. Cold weather stresses frail older people enough that they die.

So January 2014, while a deadly month as far as 2014 goes, may have been relatively healthy as far as January's go. This makes that 44% increase for January 2014-January 2015 somewhat overstated. The year-over-year increases for March to June are around 35%.

https://health.data.ny.gov/Health/Vital-Statistics-Deaths-by-Resident-County-Region-/v6zf-ydez

If you go back several years, the ratio of deaths of NYS+NYC to NYS is a very steady 35%.

You would expect the ratio of deaths in NYC to the remainder of the state to be more consistent over time, than the year to year number of deaths, the weather changes from month to month, more than the distribution of the population - not that many people summer in the Hamptons or Catskills.

I think NYC is being double counted.
Logged
DINGO Joe
dingojoe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,700
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: May 12, 2016, 12:08:22 PM »

New York State had an abnormally high increase in deaths between Jan.-June 2015:

1st half of 2015: 104.510 deaths

1st half of 2014:   75.763 deaths

That's an increase of 38% (!!!) - Even Germany had "only" an increase of 10%.

All other states had way more moderate increases of 1-10%, which is in line with the European data I posted above.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/provisional_tables/Provisional_Table02_2015Jun.pdf

It's all the Berniebros in Brooklyn.  They didn't just get purged from the voter rolls they got purged man.

There is a reason that these are called Provisional numbers.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: May 14, 2016, 04:45:57 PM »

Puerto Rico is going into a demographic death spiral.  Births fell from 17,358 in the first half of 2013 to 15,099 in the first half of 2015.  No doubt that massive decline continues.  At this rate births might have been below 30,000 in 2015.

Keep in mind Puerto Rico had as many as 91,000 births after WWII and still as many as 60,000 in the year 2000.

At the rate PR is going, they could have fertility below 1 child per woman soon... which historically has only happened during periods of extreme disease, famine, or all out war.

Birth control and emigration of young people play the biggest role but the people who hold PR's debt are literally strangling the island.  And the anemic response by congress will not solve it.  
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,058
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: May 14, 2016, 11:37:39 PM »

Puerto Rico is going into a demographic death spiral.  Births fell from 17,358 in the first half of 2013 to 15,099 in the first half of 2015.  No doubt that massive decline continues.  At this rate births might have been below 30,000 in 2015.

Keep in mind Puerto Rico had as many as 91,000 births after WWII and still as many as 60,000 in the year 2000.

At the rate PR is going, they could have fertility below 1 child per woman soon... which historically has only happened during periods of extreme disease, famine, or all out war.

Birth control and emigration of young people play the biggest role but the people who hold PR's debt are literally strangling the island.  And the anemic response by congress will not solve it.  

Puerto Rico might do well to accept a lot of refugees; sending them there isn't really much worse than sending them to a post-industrial hellscape like Utica or Detroit and the weather's better.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: May 17, 2016, 02:56:03 PM »

New York State had an abnormally high increase in deaths between Jan.-June 2015:

1st half of 2015: 104.510 deaths

1st half of 2014:   75.763 deaths

That's an increase of 38% (!!!) - Even Germany had "only" an increase of 10%.

All other states had way more moderate increases of 1-10%, which is in line with the European data I posted above.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/provisional_tables/Provisional_Table02_2015Jun.pdf
I received a response to my inquiry from the NCHS

Here are corrected values for NYS for 2015(the online version should be updated in a few days):

Monthly Count Year-to-date Count

January 14,831 14,831
February 12,890 27,721
March 13,363 41,084
April 12,637 53,721
May 12,291 66,012
June 11,595 77,607

That is a 2.4% increase.
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: June 01, 2016, 02:19:56 PM »

The New York Times noticed the death rate uptick in the U.S.:
American death rate increases for first time in a decade (via Alaska Dispatch News)

The article blames the increase largely on drug overdoses, accidental deaths, and complications associated with Alzheimers disease.  The heart disease-related death rate was also up, but not by a statistically significant margin over the same time last quarter.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: July 17, 2016, 04:26:03 AM »

Looking at France and Hungary, it would appear that the seasonal rise in deaths was unusually small in 2013/14 and then unusually large in 2014/15.

This would relate to the annual rise in deaths that occurs beginning in October and peaking in January.  In France and Hungary, deaths remained high into February and March while in many other years deaths dropped off rapidly after January.

There has been a general rise in deaths over the past 10 years and 2014 was actually the odd one out on the trend.  It would make sense that 2015 would see a higher number of deaths from the same cause that didn't kill people in 2014.

Census Bureau international gateway

Looking at France for one-year age cohorts for 2010, 2015, 2020 there has been a huge increase in older persons due to the influx of those born after WWII, replacing those who weren't born during the war. The number of persons born in 1948 is about 55% greater than those born in 1943 (at the same age). The 48ers are now 67 and beginning to die at increasing rates.

There has also been a big increase in those born after WWI, compared to those not born in WWI, though those born after WWI would have borne some of the dying in WWII. At that age, large numbers die every year (getting close to 10%).

The median age for those over 65 has been declining in France due to the post-WWII generation entering the ranks. This will drive the death rate over 65's up, while continuing to increase the death rate for the whole population.

The closer the average/medium age of the 65+ cohort is 65 the lower that cohorts death rate will be.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 14, 2016, 09:58:12 AM »

It seems the strong uptick in death rates around the world last year is correcting itself this year ...

Today, Statistics Austria released the vital statistics for the first half of 2016 and births increased by 3% compared with 2015 and deaths dropped by 8%:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.statistik.at/web_en/press/110214.html
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 14, 2016, 02:34:16 PM »

This is why the NYT article is such a sham.  Yeah.. the death rate went up worldwide because there was a one year temporary increase in f**king drug overdoses and accidental deaths that just happened to coincide with the influenza season which followed a year with a particularly light influenza season that depressed death rates worldwide.

I've officially decided that experts are nothing but complete idiots with credentials.

More likely, people that "should" have died in 2014 didn't and they cheated the Angel of Death for a year and then died at increased rates in 2015 when it got cold and germy and dark.

I would imagine that a stronger prevalence of winter time illness weakens the body rather than kills people in many cases... which makes them susceptible to other forms of death like overdose or falling or ginking your head on a metal bar...

But they really don't look into things. 

It'd be like there's a huge war going on and they would report "there has been a baffling (there's that word) increase in the number of people dying by decapitation!" while not mentioning any other causal factors like THE WAR GOING ON.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.07 seconds with 12 queries.