> similarly early ... outcomes are worse It takes time to go from infection -> sick -> diagnosis -> death. IL and CA would have had inertia following the stay-

> similarly early ... outcomes are worse It takes time to go from infection -> sick -> diagnosis -> death. IL and CA would have had inertia following the stay-at-home proclamations. CA started with 25% daily case growth and has now dropped to 12%, IL started with 40% case growth but has now dropped to 12%. IL's daily death rate increase is still higher than CA, but it is dropping. > population adjusted Population adjustment is much more important for assessing the final outcome. At early stages, the growth rate is far more important for knowing if it's under control. > climate Washington/Seattle had earlier outbreaks than CA, started distancing earlier, and have had a much lower growth than CA. We started at 30% case growth, but brought it down 20% by ~Mar 21 and 10% by Apr 1. I'm using the graphs at 91-divoc for the historical numbers, but I've found NYT to have the best looking graphs for growth rates. 91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/ https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/03/upshot/coronavirus-metro-area-tracker.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/03/upshot/corona...