H1N1 flu stats make no sense
I am seeing information that I am surprised is not getting more media interest, especially Midwest media. I am not in, nor am I trying to cause a panic for, the Midwest, but the information I have been following seems noteworthy.
At the end of April the world media latched onto the swine flu pandemic idea with a vengeance. And obviously Mexico was at the center. By the beginning of May the U.S. was tracking the confirmed cases, with Texas, California and New York having the greatest concern, with many schools closing. An assistant principal was reported in critical condition with the H1N1 flu.
Here is why I am concerned. Unless the information I have been following is flawed, the upper Midwest is now the huge H1N1 flu hot spot. I have been tracking the USA Today, CDC time lapse map of H1N1 flu confirmed cases in the United States. On May 8 we ranked No. 8 on the list with eight confirmed cases and New York at No. 1 with 73 confirmed cases. Texas and California fell in at No. 2 and No. 3. On May 9, Illinois rocketed to No. 1 with 421 confirmed cases. As of May 15 Illinois held firm at the No. 1 spot with 638 cases. At No. 2 in the country is Wisconsin with 613? Would Wisconsin have been anyone's guess to be in the top 10? This means, that of the country's 4,200-plus confirmed cases, Illinois and Wisconsin account for more than 20 percent of the U.S. total cases; 1,250 cases.
Again looking at the numbers, Mexico, the epicenter of the flue has currently 66 deaths, far more than the four in the U.S. but less than 2,500 confirmed cases. Doesn't this make Illinois, Wisconsin combined at 50 percent of Mexico's rate?
Are these numbers correct? If so why? And why doesn't this get more attention? New York's confirmed cases sit at less than 250, but in the last 7 to 10 days I have seen far more media attention there. Is it possible Illinois wishes to have less attention? Illinois has been a national embarrassment for quite sometime. But Wisconsin? They should speak up.
Gregory S. Cole
Cary