Hurricane Katrina Death Toll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrica..._.28summary.29
Here are some preliminary figures. In Mississippi, the toll is over 560 already, and the job of counting the dead there is nowhere near finished. The number of missing in all the affected areas is listed at over 35,000, but this figure, hopefully, is because of family members who have been separated and unable to contact each other.
When can we expect some kind of accurate, or "reasonable" assessment as to how many were killed, both by the hurricane's direct effects, and as a result of the extraordinary negligence on the part of the authorities? And what is that figure likely to be?
Here are some preliminary figures. In Mississippi, the toll is over 560 already, and the job of counting the dead there is nowhere near finished. The number of missing in all the affected areas is listed at over 35,000, but this figure, hopefully, is because of family members who have been separated and unable to contact each other.
When can we expect some kind of accurate, or "reasonable" assessment as to how many were killed, both by the hurricane's direct effects, and as a result of the extraordinary negligence on the part of the authorities? And what is that figure likely to be?
Comments
The only thing that I can say is :
- the death toll will be in thousands
- the death toll will be too high
I'd also be interested in knowing how many essentially killed themselves by being stupid and staying behind when they were capable of leaving.
No matter how many end up in the count, I'm surprised we haven't seen wrongful death lawsuits against the government yet -- justified or not.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
It should be noted that, statistically, a certain number of the population would have died anyway on any given day.
Good point, I wonder how many people die in NO on any given day.
No matter how many end up in the count, I'm surprised we haven't seen wrongful death lawsuits against the government yet -- justified or not.
Or the companies that helped build the levy system.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
Good point, I wonder how many people die in NO on any given day.
If my math is right, about 1/2% of the U.S. population died every day in 1998 according to this site.
So if there ends up being 20,000 dead after all the bodies are counted, that would mean about 100 of them would have died anyway. It's really not that big of a discrepancy...
...assuming the data on that Web site is accurate and I interpreted it correctly.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
So if there ends up being 20,000 dead after all the bodies are counted, that would mean about 100 of them would have died anyway. It's really not that big of a discrepancy...
Yeah, I would expect the number of bodies eaten by crocodiles will be a bigger confounder than the background death rate.
Originally posted by Towel
Yeah, I would expect the number of bodies eaten by crocodiles will be a bigger confounder than the background death rate.
Don't forget the ones washed out to sea or into Lake Ponchtrain (sp?) by receding flood waters....
Originally posted by CosmoNut
If my math is right
the annual us death rate is ~8.44/1000, so in new orleans with 484674 people it means that about 11 people die per day. the vast majority of those die from heart disease, cancer and other illnesses, with deaths/day outside of those diseases probably making up about 3/12. So it's actually a pretty low number per day on average.
Originally posted by giant
the annual us death rate is ~8.44/1000,...
So using those figures it becomes about 169 out of 20,000 dead (as a moderate estimate) that would have passed away without Katrina. A little less than what I'd figured.
Alas, I do not have the Googling prowess that you do, good giant.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
So using those figures it becomes about 169 out of 20,000 dead (as a moderate estimate) that would have passed away without Katrina.
I'm confused by what you are doing. The death rate refers to 8.44 deaths per 1000 people. In the case of New Orleans, this would come to about 77 people per week dying in the city in normal circumstances, with the deaths of 21 from heart disease, 17 from cancer and 3 from accidents, among a bunch of other things.
What you seem to be doing is taking 8.44 per 1000 deaths attributed to katrina, which, unless I am totally missing something, isn't right. Am I missing something?
Alas, I do not have the Googling prowess that you do, good giant.
Google's a cinch compared to the 99% of the stuff, online and off, that it doesn't touch and that I have to deal with for work.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
If my math is right, about 1/2% of the U.S. population died every day in 1998 according to this site.
So if there ends up being 20,000 dead after all the bodies are counted, that would mean about 100 of them would have died anyway. It's really not that big of a discrepancy...
...assuming the data on that Web site is accurate and I interpreted it correctly.
1-2% every day ? you mean every year. If 1-2 % of the US population die everyday, after two or three months, all the US population will disapear.
Originally posted by giant
I'm confused by what you are doing....
What you seem to be doing is taking 8.44 per 1000 deaths attributed to katrina, which, unless I am totally missing something, isn't right. Am I missing something?
I may be the one missing something. What I'm interested in doing is finding out how many of the dead who are attributed to Katrina would have probably died anyway without a hurricane (from cancer, a car wreck, murder, and all the other ways people die). I'm unsure if you figure that based on the total population of those hit by Katrina or the number of dead that will be counted. I can see an argument either way, but I'm no statistician.
EDIT: Assuming 4 million people in the region (to throw out a number) were hit, then you'd expect that 33,600 would have died on any given day anyway based on 8.44 per 1000. That doesn't take into account all the births on any given day.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
1-2% every day ? you mean every year. If 1-2 % of the US population die everyday, after two or three months, all the US population will disapear.
That is 0.5%. And you have slightly more people being born each day than dying.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
EDIT: Assuming 4 million people in the region (to throw out a number) were hit, then you'd expect that 33,600 would have died on any given day anyway based on 8.44 per 1000.
The 8.44 is the annual death rate, so you have to divide the result by 365 to get the daily rate. For 4 million people the daily death rate would be 92.5.
It will be interesting to see how they count deaths since the vast majority of deaths in normal conditions are due to things illnesses like cancer and heart disease. While the death count attributed to the direct effects of the hurricane are pretty clear, how do we count deaths of patients who were stranded at hospitals without proper facilities? It's also most likely the majority of those killed by the hurricane and its aftermath will be the old, sick and young.
For New Orleans parish at least it looks like anything over 11-13 deaths per day can be attributed to the hurricane and its effects.
1) ineptitude
2) willful ignorance
3) ideology
4) cronyism
(Some may overlap)
Originally posted by Powerdoc
1-2% every day ? you mean every year. If 1-2 % of the US population die everyday, after two or three months, all the US population will disapear.
But with every day that passes, the smaller the amount of deaths in real terms.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Hey, here's something to do: find out how many people died because of the inaction of our Bush-led federal government.
We're trying to have an intelligent conversation here.
FYI : No crocodiles down here. We have Alligators.
Originally posted by CosmoNut
We're trying to have an intelligent conversation here.
No, you're not.
Your motives weren't previously in question-- until that comment right there. Here we have a thread about the death toll, and one person seems all too concerned with minimizing the deaths. You're making a bit much of a very small number of people who "would have died anyway." The death toll will be much bigger, and the reasons accounting for it deserve discussion, not dismissive eye-rolling. We'll find out just how people died when the bodies start turning up. Then, we can go from there. Your concerns, meanwhile, are utterly tangental.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
No, you're not.
Your motives weren't previously in question-- until that comment right there. Here we have a thread about the death toll, and one person seems all too concerned with minimizing the deaths. You're making a bit much of a very small number of people who "would have died anyway." The death toll will be much bigger, and the reasons accounting for it deserve discussion, not dismissive eye-rolling. We'll find out just how people died when the bodies start turning up. Then, we can go from there. Your concerns, meanwhile, are utterly tangental.
Someday when Shawn grows up, he will realize that intelligent discussion doesn't include his long winded rants about the "motives" of other people which he uses to ignore little things like facts.
Nick