King County, Washington analyzes its coronavirus tests

There is a new statistical analysis by King County, Seattle, which had the earliest clusters of confirmed coronavirus deaths in the U.S.

Obviously, these trends do not necessarily translate to other communities. But they are an interesting snapshot of what is happening in the county that was considered ground zero for America’s outbreak.

Among those who have tested positive for coronavirus:


  • 53% are female
  • 47% are male


  • 5– Age 9 and under
  • 16– Age 10-19
  • 152– Age 20-29
  • 228– Age 30-39
  • 207– Age 40-47
  • 240– Age 50-59
  • 252– Age 60-69
  • 231– Age 70-79
  • 245– Age 80+

Click here for more information from King County.

Order “Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship and Hate Journalism” by Sharyl Attkisson today at Harper Collins, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Books a Million, IndieBound, Bookshop!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

5 thoughts on “King County, Washington analyzes its coronavirus tests”

  1. Mary Ann Hartzler

    Sharyl, I can’t thank you enough for your hard work and stellar reporting. I so appreciate reading an unbiased article. It seems to me that our alphabet media fails time and again to stick to the facts. Thanks, again, young lady!

  2. Hi Sharyl: My wife and I are great admirers.

    My wife has been doing a weekly and now daily CV-19 thread with deep sourcing and links for a Trump-supporters group she is administrator for. It is NOT partisan work but a wonderful resource that has generally been about 4-6 weeks ahead of the best informed media. If you or your team would like review to the posts, please let me know by email and we will give you full access to the WordPress account. My wife has accounting, economics and hospitality degrees so her skill set applies directly to issues at hand.

  3. Are the test accurate? How do we really know that it’s actually the coronavirus itself or not some type of interaction with (for example) a certain bacteria + the virus?

  4. First of all, thanks so much for reporting actual data, in contrast to frequently pointless speculation found elsewhere.

    But I have a methodology question. Did the source offer any info about how they selected the test cohort? What I’m getting at is, you could see how the statistics would be skewed, if those surveyed were people who had waited in lines at a hospital, compared with folks stopped at a random walking in a park?

    It’s good to see any data on distribution of testing results, but it’s hard to interpret its significance without knowing something about the test population. I’d appreciate it greatly if you could provide any selection information (even if only “unknown”) along with each survey in the future.. Thanks in advance.

Scroll to Top