Coronavirus – The Outlook Has Worsened • Hacker News Board

Re: Coronavirus – The Outlook Has Worsened

#31

Post by GolDDranks » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 2:58 AM UTC

9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #28

makomk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those objections seem right at all. The coronavirus deaths so far have been long, drawn-out affairs compared to the recoveries, so there's no particular reason to expact recoveries to lag deaths. We know China has been undercounting deaths as well as cases, and in any case thse estimates in this are based on non-Chinese numbers. Also, transmission outside of China hasn't just "petered" out - it was aggressive…

> The coronavirus deaths so far have been long, drawn-out affairs compared to the recoveries No, it took until several weeks into the epidemic until the number of recoveries exceeded the number of deaths. > We know China has been undercounting deaths as well as cases All deaths are counted, people don't just leave corpses lying around, although it is true that many coronavirus deaths were likely misclassified. By com…

It still makes a difference whether a death is counted as "death from COVID-19" or "death from pneumonia suspected to be COVID-19 (unverified via tests)" or "death from pneumonia (undiagnosed)" or "death from unknown cause". They changed the counting method once before, counting now more.

Re: Coronavirus – The Outlook Has Worsened

#32

Post by koheripbal » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 5:22 AM UTC

9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #28

makomk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those objections seem right at all. The coronavirus deaths so far have been long, drawn-out affairs compared to the recoveries, so there's no particular reason to expact recoveries to lag deaths. We know China has been undercounting deaths as well as cases, and in any case thse estimates in this are based on non-Chinese numbers. Also, transmission outside of China hasn't just "petered" out - it was aggressive…

> The coronavirus deaths so far have been long, drawn-out affairs compared to the recoveries No, it took until several weeks into the epidemic until the number of recoveries exceeded the number of deaths. > We know China has been undercounting deaths as well as cases All deaths are counted, people don't just leave corpses lying around, although it is true that many coronavirus deaths were likely misclassified. By com…

> the number of recoveries exceeded the number of deaths.

China has said the fatality rate is about 2%, and most experts are agreeing it's probably roughly 2% - with all your points factored in. In Wuhan, for example, it's over 4% due to hospital overload.

> All deaths are counted... many coronavirus deaths were likely misclassified.

That's really the same as being not counted in the tally of Coronavirus deaths.

> in countries like Thailand and Mexico...

The common theme here is tropical climate that makes most Coronaviruses less virulent.

This obviously cannot happen in countries like North Korea, which is likely silently enduring a pandemic that they just won't talk about.

Re: Coronavirus – The Outlook Has Worsened

#33

Post by prepend » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 12:14 PM UTC

9nGQluzmnq3M wrote: post #10

prepend wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't compute fatality rates simply by deaths/recoveries, because recoveries lag deaths by several weeks (once you're dead you're dead, but if you survive it takes a few weeks to recover and start testing negative). There are limitations with this method, but I think it’s the best possible at the time. What method do you think is better?

Count deaths & recoveries a few weeks in for cohorts that showed first symptoms on the same days. But data collection for this is hard and it takes a while too.

This is mentioned in the article and is more accurate, but isn’t possible throughout an outbreak for the reason you state.

Re: Coronavirus – The Outlook Has Worsened

#34

Post by prepend » Wed, Feb 19, 2020, 12:17 PM UTC

joosters wrote: post #9

prepend wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't compute fatality rates simply by deaths/recoveries, because recoveries lag deaths by several weeks (once you're dead you're dead, but if you survive it takes a few weeks to recover and start testing negative). There are limitations with this method, but I think it’s the best possible at the time. What method do you think is better?

You could count the number of deaths by date 'n', compared to the number of recoveries by date 'n+14', say, picking a date related to the average recovery time?

The recovery date isn’t fixed so there’s not a single “+14” that is as useful as picking the dead / known outcome.

I think this is because it’s hard to know date of infection, but it’s definite to know whether the case resulted in death or has been determined “recovered.”