Estimates for the total death count of the Second World War generally range somewhere between 70 and 85 million people. The Soviet Union suffered the highest number of fatalities of any single nation, with estimates mostly falling between 22 and 27 million deaths. China then suffered the second greatest, at around 20 million, although these figures are less certain and often overlap with the Chinese Civil War. Over 80 percent of all deaths were of those from Allied countries, and the majority of these were civilians. In contrast, 15 to 20 percent were among the Axis powers, and the majority of these were military deaths, as shown in the death ratios of Germany and Japan. Civilian deaths and atrocities It is believed that 60 to 67 percent of all deaths were civilian fatalities, largely resulting from war-related famine or disease, and war crimes or atrocities. Systematic genocide, extermination campaigns, and forced labor, particularly by the Germans, Japanese, and Soviets, led to the deaths of millions. In this regard, Nazi activities alone resulted in 17 million deaths, including six million Jews in what is now known as The Holocaust. Not only was the scale of the conflict larger than any that had come before, but the nature of and reasoning behind this loss make the Second World War stand out as one of the most devastating and cruelest conflicts in history. Problems with these statistics Although the war is considered by many to be the defining event of the 20th century, exact figures for death tolls have proven impossible to determine, for a variety of reasons. Countries such as the U.S. have fairly consistent estimates due to preserved military records and comparatively few civilian casualties, although figures still vary by source. For most of Europe, records are less accurate. Border fluctuations and the upheaval of the interwar period mean that pre-war records were already poor or non-existent for many regions. The rapid and chaotic nature of the war then meant that deaths could not be accurately recorded at the time, and mass displacement or forced relocation resulted in the deaths of many civilians outside of their homeland, which makes country-specific figures more difficult to find. Early estimates of the war’s fatalities were also taken at face value and formed the basis of many historical works; these were often very inaccurate, but the validity of the source means that the figures continue to be cited today, despite contrary evidence.

In comparison to Europe, estimate ranges are often greater across Asia, where populations were larger but pre-war data was in short supply. Many of the Asian countries with high death tolls were European colonies, and the actions of authorities in the metropoles, such as the diversion of resources from Asia to Europe, led to millions of deaths through famine and disease. Additionally, over one million African soldiers were drafted into Europe’s armies during the war, yet individual statistics are unavailable for most of these colonies or successor states (notably Algeria and Libya). Thousands of Asian and African military deaths went unrecorded or are included with European or Japanese figures, and there are no reliable figures for deaths of millions from countries across North Africa or East Asia. Additionally, many concentration camp records were destroyed, and such records in Africa and Asia were even sparser than in Europe. While the Second World War is one of the most studied academic topics of the past century, it is unlikely that we will ever have a clear number for the lives lost in the conflict.

This dataset contains counts of deaths for California counties based on information entered on death certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out-of-state deaths to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all deaths that occurred during the time period. Deaths involving injuries from external or environmental forces, such as accidents, homicide and suicide, often require additional investigation that tends to delay certification of the cause and manner of death. This can result in significant under-reporting of these deaths in provisional data.

The final data tables include both deaths that occurred in each California county regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and deaths to residents of each California county (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes deaths that occurred in each county regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by age, gender, race-ethnicity, and death place type. Deaths due to all causes (ALL) and selected underlying cause of death categories are provided. See temporal coverage for more information on which combinations are available for which years.

The cause of death categories are based solely on the underlying cause of death as coded by the International Classification of Diseases. The underlying cause of death is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "the disease or injury which initiated the train of events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury." It is a single value assigned to each death based on the details as entered on the death certificate. When more than one cause is listed, the order in which they are listed can affect which cause is coded as the underlying cause. This means that similar events could be coded with different underlying causes of death depending on variations in how they were entered. Consequently, while underlying cause of death provides a convenient comparison between cause of death categories, it may not capture the full impact of each cause of death as it does not always take into account all conditions contributing to the death.

Jamaica: Death rate, per 1000 people: The latest value from 2023 is 8.08 deaths per 1000 people, an increase from 7.91 deaths per 1000 people in 2022. In comparison, the world average is 7.70 deaths per 1000 people, based on data from 196 countries. Historically, the average for Jamaica from 1960 to 2023 is 7.72 deaths per 1000 people. The minimum value, 6.36 deaths per 1000 people, was reached in 2012 while the maximum of 9.7 deaths per 1000 people was recorded in 2021.

Based on a comparison of coronavirus deaths in 210 countries relative to their population, Peru had the most losses to COVID-19 up until July 13, 2022. As of the same date, the virus had infected over 557.8 million people worldwide, and the number of deaths had totaled more than 6.3 million. Note, however, that COVID-19 test rates can vary per country. Additionally, big differences show up between countries when combining the number of deaths against confirmed COVID-19 cases. The source seemingly does not differentiate between "the Wuhan strain" (2019-nCOV) of COVID-19, "the Kent mutation" (B.1.1.7) that appeared in the UK in late 2020, the 2021 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) from India or the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) from South Africa.

The difficulties of death figures

This table aims to provide a complete picture on the topic, but it very much relies on data that has become more difficult to compare. As the coronavirus pandemic developed across the world, countries already used different methods to count fatalities, and they sometimes changed them during the course of the pandemic. On April 16, for example, the Chinese city of Wuhan added a 50 percent increase in their death figures to account for community deaths. These deaths occurred outside of hospitals and went unaccounted for so far. The state of New York did something similar two days before, revising their figures with 3,700 new deaths as they started to include “assumed” coronavirus victims. The United Kingdom started counting deaths in care homes and private households on April 29, adjusting their number with about 5,000 new deaths (which were corrected lowered again by the same amount on August 18). This makes an already difficult comparison even more difficult. Belgium, for example, counts suspected coronavirus deaths in their figures, whereas other countries have not done that (yet). This means two things. First, it could have a big impact on both current as well as future figures. On April 16 already, UK health experts stated that if their numbers were corrected for community deaths like in Wuhan, the UK number would change from 205 to “above 300”. This is exactly what happened two weeks later. Second, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly which countries already have “revised” numbers (like Belgium, Wuhan or New York) and which ones do not. One work-around could be to look at (freely accessible) timelines that track the reported daily increase of deaths in certain countries. Several of these are available on our platform, such as for Belgium, Italy and Sweden. A sudden large increase might be an indicator that the domestic sources changed their methodology.

Where are these numbers coming from?

The numbers shown here were collected by Johns Hopkins University, a source that manually checks the data with domestic health authorities. For the majority of countries, this is from national authorities. In some cases, like China, the United States, Canada or Australia, city reports or other various state authorities were consulted. In this statistic, these separately reported numbers were put together. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

This dataset contains counts of deaths for California as a whole based on information entered on death certificates. Final counts are derived from static data and include out-of-state deaths to California residents, whereas provisional counts are derived from incomplete and dynamic data. Provisional counts are based on the records available when the data was retrieved and may not represent all deaths that occurred during the time period. Deaths involving injuries from external or environmental forces, such as accidents, homicide and suicide, often require additional investigation that tends to delay certification of the cause and manner of death. This can result in significant under-reporting of these deaths in provisional data.

The final data tables include both deaths that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence) and deaths to California residents (by residence), whereas the provisional data table only includes deaths that occurred in California regardless of the place of residence (by occurrence). The data are reported as totals, as well as stratified by age, gender, race-ethnicity, and death place type. Deaths due to all causes (ALL) and selected underlying cause of death categories are provided. See temporal coverage for more information on which combinations are available for which years.

The cause of death categories are based solely on the underlying cause of death as coded by the International Classification of Diseases. The underlying cause of death is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "the disease or injury which initiated the train of events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury." It is a single value assigned to each death based on the details as entered on the death certificate. When more than one cause is listed, the order in which they are listed can affect which cause is coded as the underlying cause. This means that similar events could be coded with different underlying causes of death depending on variations in how they were entered. Consequently, while underlying cause of death provides a convenient comparison between cause of death categories, it may not capture the full impact of each cause of death as it does not always take into account all conditions contributing to the death.

Number and percentage of deaths, by month and place of residence, 1991 to most recent year.

This dataset provides values for CORONAVIRUS DEATHS reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

One in every 100 children dies before completing one year of life. Around 68 percent of infant mortality is attributed to deaths of children before completing 1 month. 15,000 children die every day – Child mortality is an everyday tragedy of enormous scale that rarely makes the headlines Child mortality rates have declined in all world regions, but the world is not on track to reach the Sustainable Development Goal for child mortality Before the Modern Revolution child mortality was very high in all societies that we have knowledge of – a quarter of all children died in the first year of life, almost half died before reaching the end of puberty Over the last two centuries all countries in the world have made very rapid progress against child mortality. From 1800 to 1950 global mortality has halved from around 43% to 22.5%. Since 1950 the mortality rate has declined five-fold to 4.5% in 2015. All countries in the world have benefitted from this progress In the past it was very common for parents to see children die, because both, child mortality rates and fertility rates were very high. In Europe in the mid 18th century parents lost on average between 3 and 4 of their children Based on this overview we are asking where the world is today – where are children dying and what are they dying from?

5.4 million children died in 2017 – Where did these children die? Pneumonia is the most common cause of death, preterm births and neonatal disorders is second, and diarrheal diseases are third – What are children today dying from? This is the basis for answering the question what can we do to make further progress against child mortality? We will extend this entry over the course of 2020.

@article{owidchildmortality, author = {Max Roser, Hannah Ritchie and Bernadeta Dadonaite}, title = {Child and Infant Mortality}, journal = {Our World in Data}, year = {2013}, note = {https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality} }

Rank, number of deaths, percentage of deaths, and age-specific mortality rates for the leading causes of death, by age group and sex, 2000 to most recent year.

COVID-19 rate of death, or the known deaths divided by confirmed cases, was over ten percent in Yemen, the only country that has 1,000 or more cases. This according to a calculation that combines coronavirus stats on both deaths and registered cases for 221 different countries. Note that death rates are not the same as the chance of dying from an infection or the number of deaths based on an at-risk population. By April 26, 2022, the virus had infected over 510.2 million people worldwide, and led to a loss of 6.2 million. The source seemingly does not differentiate between "the Wuhan strain" (2019-nCOV) of COVID-19, "the Kent mutation" (B.1.1.7) that appeared in the UK in late 2020, the 2021 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) from India or the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) from South Africa.

Where are these numbers coming from?

The numbers shown here were collected by Johns Hopkins University, a source that manually checks the data with domestic health authorities. For the majority of countries, this is from national authorities. In some cases, like China, the United States, Canada or Australia, city reports or other various state authorities were consulted. In this statistic, these separately reported numbers were put together. Note that Statista aims to also provide domestic source material for a more complete picture, and not to just look at one particular source. Examples are these statistics on the confirmed coronavirus cases in Russia or the COVID-19 cases in Italy, both of which are from domestic sources. For more information or other freely accessible content, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

A word on the flaws of numbers like this

People are right to ask whether these numbers are at all representative or not for several reasons. First, countries worldwide decide differently on who gets tested for the virus, meaning that comparing case numbers or death rates could to some extent be misleading. Germany, for example, started testing relatively early once the country’s first case was confirmed in Bavaria in January 2020, whereas Italy tests for the coronavirus postmortem. Second, not all people go to see (or can see, due to testing capacity) a doctor when they have mild symptoms. Countries like Norway and the Netherlands, for example, recommend people with non-severe symptoms to just stay at home. This means not all cases are known all the time, which could significantly alter the death rate as it is presented here. Third and finally, numbers like this change very frequently depending on how the pandemic spreads or the national healthcare capacity. It is therefore recommended to look at other (freely accessible) content that dives more into specifics, such as the coronavirus testing capacity in India or the number of hospital beds in the UK. Only with additional pieces of information can you get the full picture, something that this statistic in its current state simply cannot provide.

Saudi Arabia: Death rate, per 1000 people: The latest value from 2023 is 2.34 deaths per 1000 people, a decline from 2.57 deaths per 1000 people in 2022. In comparison, the world average is 7.70 deaths per 1000 people, based on data from 196 countries. Historically, the average for Saudi Arabia from 1960 to 2023 is 7.3 deaths per 1000 people. The minimum value, 2.17 deaths per 1000 people, was reached in 2017 while the maximum of 21.09 deaths per 1000 people was recorded in 1960.

Every year the CDC releases the country’s most detailed report on death in the United States under the National Vital Statistics Systems. This mortality dataset is a record of every death in the country for 2005 through 2015, including detailed information about causes of death and the demographic background of the deceased.

It's been said that "statistics are human beings with the tears wiped off." This is especially true with this dataset. Each death record represents somebody's loved one, often connected with a lifetime of memories and sometimes tragically too short.

Putting the sensitive nature of the topic aside, analyzing mortality data is essential to understanding the complex circumstances of death across the country. The US Government uses this data to determine life expectancy and understand how death in the U.S. differs from the rest of the world. Whether you’re looking for macro trends or analyzing unique circumstances, we challenge you to use this dataset to find your own answers to one of life’s great mysteries.

Overview

This dataset is a collection of CSV files each containing one year's worth of data and paired JSON files containing the code mappings, plus an ICD 10 code set. The CSVs were reformatted from their original fixed-width file formats using information extracted from the CDC's PDF manuals using this script. Please note that this process may have introduced errors as the text extracted from the pdf is not a perfect match. If you have any questions or find errors in the preparation process, please leave a note in the forums. We hope to publish additional years of data using this method soon.

A more detailed overview of the data can be found here. You'll find that the fields are consistent within this time window, but some of data codes change every few years. For example, the 113_cause_recode entry 069 only covers ICD codes (I10,I12) in 2005, but by 2015 it covers (I10,I12,I15). When I post data from years prior to 2005, expect some of the fields themselves to change as well.

All data comes from the CDC’s National Vital Statistics Systems, with the exception of the Icd10Code, which are sourced from the World Health Organization.

Project ideas

• The CDC's mortality data was the basis of a widely publicized paper, by Anne Case and Nobel prize winner Angus Deaton, arguing that middle-aged whites are dying at elevated rates. One of the criticisms against the paper is that it failed to properly account for the exact ages within the broad bins available through the CDC's WONDER tool. What do these results look like with exact/not-binned age data?
• Similarly, how sensitive are the mortality trends being discussed in the news to the choice of bin-widths?
• As noted above, the data preparation process could have introduced errors. Can you find any discrepancies compared to the aggregate metrics on WONDER? If so, please let me know in the forums!
• WONDER is cited in numerous economics, sociology, and public health research papers. Can you find any papers whose conclusions would be altered if they used the exact data available here rather than binned data from Wonder?

Differences from the first version of the dataset

• This version of the dataset was prepared in a completely different many. This has allowed us to provide a much larger volume of data and ensure that codes are available for every field.
• We've replaced the batch of sql files with a single JSON per year. Kaggle's platform currently offer's better support for JSON files, and this keeps the number of files manageable.
• A tutorial kernel providing a quick introduction to the new format is available here.
• Lastly, I apologize if the transition has interrupted anyone's work! If need be, you can still download v1.

The New York Times is releasing a series of data files with cumulative counts of coronavirus cases in the United States, at the state and county level, over time. We are compiling this time series data from state and local governments and health departments in an attempt to provide a complete record of the ongoing outbreak.

Since late January, The Times has tracked cases of coronavirus in real time as they were identified after testing. Because of the widespread shortage of testing, however, the data is necessarily limited in the picture it presents of the outbreak.

We have used this data to power our maps and reporting tracking the outbreak, and it is now being made available to the public in response to requests from researchers, scientists and government officials who would like access to the data to better understand the outbreak.

The data begins with the first reported coronavirus case in Washington State on Jan. 21, 2020. We will publish regular updates to the data in this repository.

For most of human history, pregnancy and childbirth were very risky; mothers would die in at least 1 in 100 pregnancies.1

Since the average woman would have at least four or five children, the lifetime risk of dying from maternal causes would be at least 1 in 25.2 This was true everywhere.

Thankfully, that’s no longer the case. We’ve made huge strides in not only protecting infants in childbirth and the early stages of their lives, but we’ve also made it much safer for women.

But we’re not done yet. There are still huge inequalities in the risks of pregnancy across the world. Pregnant women in countries like Sierra Leone and Kenya are around 100 times more likely to die during pregnancy or childbirth than those in countries like Norway, Sweden, or Germany.3 But it doesn’t have to be this way. We could save hundreds of thousands of lives a year by closing these gaps.

I’ve compared three scenarios in the chart below to clarify these points.

First, we can see that the situation today is awful. 286,000 women died from maternal causes in 2020.4 That’s 784 deaths per day on average, or one mother dying every two minutes.5

Second, we can consider the very high maternal mortality rates of the past. Particularly good long-term data is available for Finland or Sweden, which shows that in 1750, around 900 women died per 100,000 live births.6 Since there were 135 million births in 2020, I calculate that 1.2 million women would have died from maternal causes that year if these rates hadn’t improved.7 Things are much, much better than they used to be.

Finally, things can still be much better. We know this because some countries have maternal mortality rates that are far lower than the global average. And they all used to be in a similar position to the worst-off countries today. In Europe, the maternal mortality rate was 8 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2020. That’s around 25 times lower than the global average.8 If all countries could achieve the same outcomes as Europe, 11,000 women would have died from maternal causes in 2020 — a small fraction of the 286,000 deaths that occurred.9

Providing the best conditions for women everywhere would reduce the global death toll by 275,000 maternal deaths a year.

India marks one COVID-19 death every 5 minutes

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/11C98/production/_118165827_gettyimages-1232465340.jpg" alt="">

Content

People across India scrambled for life-saving oxygen supplies on Friday and patients lay dying outside hospitals as the capital recorded the equivalent of one death from COVID-19 every five minutes.

For the second day running, the country’s overnight infection total was higher than ever recorded anywhere in the world since the pandemic began last year, at 332,730.

India’s second wave has hit with such ferocity that hospitals are running out of oxygen, beds, and anti-viral drugs. Many patients have been turned away because there was no space for them, doctors in Delhi said.

https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/XhVWo4SOloJoXaQLrxxUIQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MA--/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2021-04/8aa568f0-a3e0-11eb-8ff6-6b9a188e374a" alt="">

Mass cremations have been taking place as the crematoriums have run out of space. Ambulance sirens sounded throughout the day in the deserted streets of the capital, one of India’s worst-hit cities, where a lockdown is in place to try and stem the transmission of the virus. source

Dataset

The dataset consists of the tweets made with the #IndiaWantsOxygen hashtag covering the tweets from the past week. The dataset totally consists of 25,440 tweets and will be updated on a daily basis.

The description of the features is given below | No |Columns | Descriptions | | -- | -- | -- | | 1 | user_name | The name of the user, as they’ve defined it. | | 2 | user_location | The user-defined location for this account’s profile. | | 3 | user_description | The user-defined UTF-8 string describing their account. | | 4 | user_created | Time and date, when the account was created. | | 5 | user_followers | The number of followers an account currently has. | | 6 | user_friends | The number of friends an account currently has. | | 7 | user_favourites | The number of favorites an account currently has | | 8 | user_verified | When true, indicates that the user has a verified account | | 9 | date | UTC time and date when the Tweet was created | | 10 | text | The actual UTF-8 text of the Tweet | | 11 | hashtags | All the other hashtags posted in the tweet along with #IndiaWantsOxygen | | 12 | source | Utility used to post the Tweet, Tweets from the Twitter website have a source value - web | | 13 | is_retweet | Indicates whether this Tweet has been Retweeted by the authenticating user. |

Acknowledgements

https://globalnews.ca/news/7785122/india-covid-19-hospitals-record/ Image courtesy: BBC and Reuters

Inspiration

The past few days have been really depressing after seeing these incidents. These tweets are the voice of the indians requesting help and people all over the globe asking their own countries to support India by providing oxygen tanks.

And I strongly believe that this is not just some data, but the pure emotions of people and their call for help. And I hope we as data scientists could contribute on this front by providing valuable information and insights.

Life table data for "Bounce backs amid continued losses: Life expectancy changes since COVID-19"

cc-by Jonas Schöley, José Manuel Aburto, Ilya Kashnitsky, Maxi S. Kniffka, Luyin Zhang, Hannaliis Jaadla, Jennifer B. Dowd, and Ridhi Kashyap. "Bounce backs amid continued losses: Life expectancy changes since COVID-19".

These are CSV files of life tables over the years 2015 through 2021 across 29 countries analyzed in the paper "Bounce backs amid continued losses: Life expectancy changes since COVID-19".

40-lifetables.csv

Life table statistics 2015 through 2021 by sex, region and quarter with uncertainty quantiles based on Poisson replication of death counts. Actual life tables and expected life tables (under the assumption of pre-COVID mortality trend continuation) are provided.

30-lt_input.csv

Life table input data.

id: unique row identifier

region_iso: iso3166-2 region codes

sex: Male, Female, Total

year: iso year

age_start: start of age group

age_width: width of age group, Inf for age_start 100, otherwise 1

nweeks_year: number of weeks in that year, 52 or 53

death_total: number of deaths by any cause

population_py: person-years of exposure (adjusted for leap-weeks and missing weeks in input data on all cause deaths)

death_total_nweeksmiss: number of weeks in the raw input data with at least one missing death count for this region-sex-year stratum. missings are counted when the week is implicitly missing from the input data or if any NAs are encounted in this week or if age groups are implicitly missing for this week in the input data (e.g. 40-45, 50-55)

death_total_minnageraw: the minimum number of age-groups in the raw input data within this region-sex-year stratum

death_total_maxnageraw: the maximum number of age-groups in the raw input data within this region-sex-year stratum

death_total_minopenageraw: the minimum age at the start of the open age group in the raw input data within this region-sex-year stratum

death_total_maxopenageraw: the maximum age at the start of the open age group in the raw input data within this region-sex-year stratum

death_total_source: source of the all-cause death data

death_total_prop_q1: observed proportion of deaths in first quarter of year

death_total_prop_q2: observed proportion of deaths in second quarter of year

death_total_prop_q3: observed proportion of deaths in third quarter of year

death_total_prop_q4: observed proportion of deaths in fourth quarter of year

death_expected_prop_q1: expected proportion of deaths in first quarter of year

death_expected_prop_q2: expected proportion of deaths in second quarter of year

death_expected_prop_q3: expected proportion of deaths in third quarter of year

death_expected_prop_q4: expected proportion of deaths in fourth quarter of year

population_midyear: midyear population (July 1st)

population_source: source of the population count/exposure data

death_covid: number of deaths due to covid

death_covid_date: number of deaths due to covid as of

death_covid_nageraw: the number of age groups in the covid input data

ex_wpp_estimate: life expectancy estimates from the World Population prospects for a five year period, merged at the midpoint year

ex_hmd_estimate: life expectancy estimates from the Human Mortality Database

nmx_hmd_estimate: death rate estimates from the Human Mortality Database

nmx_cntfc: Lee-Carter death rate projections based on trend in the years 2015 through 2019

Deaths

source:

STMF input data series (https://www.mortality.org/Public/STMF/Outputs/stmf.csv)

ONS for GB-EAW pre 2020

CDC for US pre 2020

STMF:

harmonized to single ages via pclm

pclm iterates over country, sex, year, and within-year age grouping pattern and converts irregular age groupings, which may vary by country, year and week into a regular age grouping of 0:110

smoothing parameters estimated via BIC grid search seperately for every pclm iteration

last age group set to [110,111)

ages 100:110+ are then summed into 100+ to be consistent with mid-year population information

deaths in unknown weeks are considered; deaths in unknown ages are not considered

ONS:

data already in single ages

ages 100:105+ are summed into 100+ to be consistent with mid-year population information

PCLM smoothing applied to for consistency reasons

CDC:

The CDC data comes in single ages 0:100 for the US. For 2020 we only have the STMF data in a much coarser age grouping, i.e. (0, 1, 5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, 85+). In order to calculate life-tables in a manner consistent with 2020, we summarise the pre 2020 US death counts into the 2020 age grouping and then apply the pclm ungrouping into single year ages, mirroring the approach to the 2020 data

Population

source:

for years 2000 to 2019: World Population Prospects 2019 single year-age population estimates 1950-2019

for year 2020: World Population Prospects 2019 single year-age population projections 2020-2100

mid-year population

mid-year population translated into exposures:

if a region reports annual deaths using the Gregorian calendar definition of a year (365 or 366 days long) set exposures equal to mid year population estimates

if a region reports annual deaths using the iso-week-year definition of a year (364 or 371 days long), and if there is a leap-week in that year, set exposures equal to 371/364*mid_year_population to account for the longer reporting period. in years without leap-weeks set exposures equal to mid year population estimates. further multiply by fraction of observed weeks on all weeks in a year.

COVID deaths

source: COVerAGE-DB (https://osf.io/mpwjq/)

the data base reports cumulative numbers of COVID deaths over days of a year, we extract the most up to date yearly total

External life expectancy estimates

source:

World Population Prospects (https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Files/1_Indicators%20(Standard)/CSV_FILES/WPP2019_Life_Table_Medium.csv), estimates for the five year period 2015-2019

Human Mortality Database (https://mortality.org/), single year and age tables

South Africa ZA: Death Rate: Crude: per 1000 People data was reported at 9.793 Ratio in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 10.102 Ratio for 2015. South Africa ZA: Death Rate: Crude: per 1000 People data is updated yearly, averaging 11.455 Ratio from Dec 1960 (Median) to 2016, with 57 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 14.815 Ratio in 1960 and a record low of 8.199 Ratio in 1991. South Africa ZA: Death Rate: Crude: per 1000 People data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s South Africa – Table ZA.World Bank: Population and Urbanization Statistics. Crude death rate indicates the number of deaths occurring during the year, per 1,000 population estimated at midyear. Subtracting the crude death rate from the crude birth rate provides the rate of natural increase, which is equal to the rate of population change in the absence of migration.; ; (1) United Nations Population Division. World Population Prospects: 2017 Revision. (2) Census reports and other statistical publications from national statistical offices, (3) Eurostat: Demographic Statistics, (4) United Nations Statistical Division. Population and Vital Statistics Reprot (various years), (5) U.S. Census Bureau: International Database, and (6) Secretariat of the Pacific Community: Statistics and Demography Programme.; Weighted average;

Updates

• Notice of data discontinuation: Since the start of the pandemic, AP has reported case and death counts from data provided by Johns Hopkins University. Johns Hopkins University has announced that they will stop their daily data collection efforts after March 10. As Johns Hopkins stops providing data, the AP will also stop collecting daily numbers for COVID cases and deaths. The HHS and CDC now collect and visualize key metrics for the pandemic. AP advises using those resources when reporting on the pandemic going forward.

  • CDC Weekly case and death counts (national and state level)
  • CDC County level cases and deaths
  • HHS New hospital admissions
  • CDC NowCast COVID variant proportions (national and regional level)

• April 9, 2020

  • The population estimate data for New York County, NY has been updated to include all five New York City counties (Kings County, Queens County, Bronx County, Richmond County and New York County). This has been done to match the Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data, which aggregates counts for the five New York City counties to New York County.

• April 20, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins death totals in the US now include confirmed and probable deaths in accordance with CDC guidelines as of April 14. One significant result of this change was an increase of more than 3,700 deaths in the New York City count. This change will likely result in increases for death counts elsewhere as well. The AP does not alter the Johns Hopkins source data, so probable deaths are included in this dataset as well.

• April 29, 2020

  • The AP is now providing timeseries data for counts of COVID-19 cases and deaths. The raw counts are provided here unaltered, along with a population column with Census ACS-5 estimates and calculated daily case and death rates per 100,000 people. Please read the updated caveats section for more information.

• September 1st, 2020

  • Johns Hopkins is now providing counts for the five New York City counties individually.

• February 12, 2021

  • The Ohio Department of Health recently announced that as many as 4,000 COVID-19 deaths may have been underreported through the state’s reporting system, and that the "daily reported death counts will be high for a two to three-day period."
  • Because deaths data will be anomalous for consecutive days, we have chosen to freeze Ohio's rolling average for daily deaths at the last valid measure until Johns Hopkins is able to back-distribute the data. The raw daily death counts, as reported by Johns Hopkins and including the backlogged death data, will still be present in the new_deaths column.

• February 16, 2021

  - Johns Hopkins has reconciled Ohio's historical deaths data with the state.

  Overview

The AP is using data collected by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering as our source for outbreak caseloads and death counts for the United States and globally.

The Hopkins data is available at the county level in the United States. The AP has paired this data with population figures and county rural/urban designations, and has calculated caseload and death rates per 100,000 people. Be aware that caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.

This data is from the Hopkins dashboard that is updated regularly throughout the day. Like all organizations dealing with data, Hopkins is constantly refining and cleaning up their feed, so there may be brief moments where data does not appear correctly. At this link, you’ll find the Hopkins daily data reports, and a clean version of their feed.

The AP is updating this dataset hourly at 45 minutes past the hour.

To learn more about AP's data journalism capabilities for publishers, corporations and financial institutions, go here or email kromano@ap.org.

Queries

Use AP's queries to filter the data or to join to other datasets we've made available to help cover the coronavirus pandemic

• Filter cases by state here

• Rank states by their status as current hotspots. Calculates the 7-day rolling average of new cases per capita in each state: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=481e82a4-1b2f-41c2-9ea1-d91aa4b3b1ac

• Find recent hotspots within your state by running a query to calculate the 7-day rolling average of new cases by capita in each county: https://data.world/associatedpress/johns-hopkins-coronavirus-case-tracker/workspace/query?queryid=b566f1db-3231-40fe-8099-311909b7b687&showTemplatePreview=true

• Join county-level case data to an earlier dataset released by AP on local hospital capacity here. To find out more about the hospital capacity dataset, see the full details.

• Pull the 100 counties with the highest per-capita confirmed cases here

• Rank all the counties by the highest per-capita rate of new cases in the past 7 days here. Be aware that because this ranks per-capita caseloads, very small counties may rise to the very top, so take into account raw caseload figures as well.

Interactive

The AP has designed an interactive map to track COVID-19 cases reported by Johns Hopkins.

@(https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/15/)

Interactive Embed Code

<iframe title="USA counties (2018) choropleth map Mapping COVID-19 cases by county" aria-describedby="" id="datawrapper-chart-nRyaf" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nRyaf/10/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="width: 0; min-width: 100% !important;" height="400"></iframe><script type="text/javascript">(function() {'use strict';window.addEventListener('message', function(event) {if (typeof event.data['datawrapper-height'] !== 'undefined') {for (var chartId in event.data['datawrapper-height']) {var iframe = document.getElementById('datawrapper-chart-' + chartId) || document.querySelector("iframe[src*='" + chartId + "']");if (!iframe) {continue;}iframe.style.height = event.data['datawrapper-height'][chartId] + 'px';}}});})();</script>

Caveats

• This data represents the number of cases and deaths reported by each state and has been collected by Johns Hopkins from a number of sources cited on their website.
• In some cases, deaths or cases of people who've crossed state lines -- either to receive treatment or because they became sick and couldn't return home while traveling -- are reported in a state they aren't currently in, because of state reporting rules.
• In some states, there are a number of cases not assigned to a specific county -- for those cases, the county name is "unassigned to a single county"
• This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University's COVID-19 tracking project. The AP is simply making it available here for ease of use for reporters and members.
• Caseloads may reflect the availability of tests -- and the ability to turn around test results quickly -- rather than actual disease spread or true infection rates.
• Population estimates at the county level are drawn from 2014-18 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey.
• The Urban/Rural classification scheme is from the Center for Disease Control and Preventions's National Center for Health Statistics. It puts each county into one of six categories -- from Large Central Metro to Non-Core -- according to population and other characteristics. More details about the classifications can be found here.

Johns Hopkins timeseries data - Johns Hopkins pulls data regularly to update their dashboard. Once a day, around 8pm EDT, Johns Hopkins adds the counts for all areas they cover to the timeseries file. These counts are snapshots of the latest cumulative counts provided by the source on that day. This can lead to inconsistencies if a source updates their historical data for accuracy, either increasing or decreasing the latest cumulative count. - Johns Hopkins periodically edits their historical timeseries data for accuracy. They provide a file documenting all errors in their timeseries files that they have identified and fixed here

Attribution

This data should be credited to Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 tracking project

CONTENT

The US Census Bureau's world population clock estimated that the global population as of September 2022 was 7,922,312,800 people and was expected to reach 8 billion by mid-November of 2022. This total far exceeds the 2015 world population of 7.2 billion. The world's population continues to increase by roughly 140 people per minute, with births outweighing deaths in most countries.

Overall, however, the rate of population growth has been slowing for several decades. This slowdown is expected to continue until the rate of population growth reaches zero (an equal number of births and deaths) around 2080-2100, at a population of approximately 10.4 billion people. After this time, the population growth rate is expected to turn negative, resulting in global population decline.

Countries with more than 1 billion people China is currently the most populous country in the world, with a population estimated at more than 1.42 billion as of September 2022. Only one other country in the world boasts a population of more than 1 billion people: India, whose population is estimated to be 1.41 billion people—and rising.

The American Civil War is the conflict with the largest number of American military fatalities in history. In fact, the Civil War's death toll is comparable to all other major wars combined, the deadliest of which were the World Wars, which have a combined death toll of more than 520,000 American fatalities. The ongoing series of conflicts and interventions in the Middle East and North Africa, collectively referred to as the War on Terror in the west, has a combined death toll of more than 7,000 for the U.S. military since 2001. Other records In terms of the number of deaths per day, the American Civil War is still at the top, with an average of 425 deaths per day, while the First and Second World Wars have averages of roughly 100 and 200 fatalities per day respectively. Technically, the costliest battle in U.S. military history was the Battle of Elsenborn Ridge, which was a part of the Battle of the Bulge in the Second World War, and saw upwards of 5,000 deaths over 10 days. However, the Battle of Gettysburg had more military fatalities of American soldiers, with almost 3,200 Union deaths and over 3,900 Confederate deaths, giving a combined total of more than 7,000. The Battle of Antietam is viewed as the bloodiest day in American military history, with over 3,600 combined fatalities and almost 23,000 total casualties on September 17, 1862. Revised Civil War figures For more than a century, the total death toll of the American Civil War was generally accepted to be around 620,000, a number which was first proposed by Union historians William F. Fox and Thomas L. Livermore in 1888. This number was calculated by using enlistment figures, battle reports, and census data, however many prominent historians since then have thought the number should be higher. In 2011, historian J. David Hacker conducted further investigations and claimed that the number was closer to 750,000 (and possibly as high as 850,000). While many Civil War historians agree that this is possible, and even likely, obtaining consistently accurate figures has proven to be impossible until now; both sides were poor at keeping detailed records throughout the war, and much of the Confederacy's records were lost by the war's end. Many Confederate widows also did not register their husbands death with the authorities, as they would have then been ineligible for benefits.