Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 462 posts

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#401

Post by DiffEq »

defen wrote: post #93
robocat wrote: post #84

Firstly, there is 10 weeks of evidence on what other countries have done to avoid transmission. Taiwan, Vietnam, South Korea, China, and Japan all show a variety of strategies and have some successes under their belts. Sure, it’s messy social data, and they have systematic differences from other countries, but it’s real data about what is working. Ioannidis says: “If we assume that case fatality rate among individual…

> “If we assume that case fatality rate among individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 is 0.3% in the general population — a mid-range guess from my Diamond Princess analysis — and that 1% of the U.S. population gets infected (about 3.3 million people), this would translate to about 10,000 deaths.” Why would we use the Diamond Princess CFR instead of China's, or Italy's, or South Korea's? Where does the idea of 1% come fro…

From the CDC As of 24-Mar there have been 589 deaths of 46292 tested which is 1.27% Mortality Rate. Not 3% or 4% as was initially reported. The more we test, as the days go on, we see this is not nearly as deadly as we thought. This will continue to decline as we test more and probably be around Germany and Korea's < 0.5%

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#402

Post by greedo »

kevingadd wrote: post #296
ropiwqefjnpoa wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The response will have it consequences too, lost lives, destroyed businesses, ruined families, lost requirement savings.

What ruins families more, a breadwinner losing their job due to a shutdown or spending a month in the hospital? P.S. You're probably not getting paid wages during that month in the hospital. Have fun paying off those ICU medical bills when you get back if you still have a job somehow and weren't replaced by someone who wasn't on a ventilator. Unemployed parents are at least around to look after the kids. A parent sic…

And that's assuming that you're at 100% when discharged from the ICU. We still don't know all of the long term issues with internal organ damage from COVID-19 survivors.

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#403

Post by Hitton »

easytiger wrote: post #379
Retric wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Dimond Princess was evacuated. It’s passengers where unusually healthy for their age range, and while older than the general population had few people over 85 which is the most at risk population. Further, these people got world class care from experts and whatever minimal care an overworked heath system could provide. Given all that they still had 9 deaths out of 712 infected with many still in critical conditio…

> It’s passengers where unusually healthy for their age range based on what?

Based on going on cruise. People who are bedridden or who can barely walk don't usually do that.

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#404

Post by marknutter »

bugzz wrote: post #204
Barrin92 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why would we use the Diamond Princess CFR instead of China's, or Italy's, or South Korea's? because everyone on the diamond princess was tested. So we know for sure how many cases we are dealing within the sample. ~0.3 and ~0.9% are also not optimistic guesses but the current numbers for Germany and SK. Italy sits at 9%. So the situation is either that Italy is vastly underestimating cases, or Germany and South Kore…

Go check South Korea's numbers again. As their cases have resolved, death rate has steadily increased, and it's now at 1.33%. It will continue to rise. Same with Germany, it just takes time to die. South Korea had already found majority of their current cases 2-3 weeks ago, but deaths are only now picking up. Edit: now 1.37%, up again since I checked a couple hours ago. The same rise in death rate was observed way ba…

Unless they have a test that determines whether fully recovered people had it at some point, they are never going to get an accurate CFR.

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#405

Post by marknutter »

CydeWeys wrote: post #337
hyperbovine wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weirdly enough, just yesterday I took all available sequence data currently on GISAID, used it to estimate R0, and got ... 1.3.

If that were true then how can you possibly explain how rapidly the pandemic is spreading?

It's curiously spreading at the exact same rate that tests are being administered. Curious indeed..

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#406

Post by [deleted] »

marknutter wrote: post #405
CydeWeys wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true then how can you possibly explain how rapidly the pandemic is spreading?

It's curiously spreading at the exact same rate that tests are being administered. Curious indeed..

[deleted]

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#407

Post by marknutter »

gpderetta wrote: post #280
listsfrin wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In normal times Italy has a death rate of 10 deaths/1000 people. Which translates to ~1500 daily for a population of 60 millions. What were they doing previously with the dead?

Those people haven't stopped dying. As a comparison, 700 people have been dying every day for covid-19 in Italy. Also deaths are not (yet) evenly distributed but greatly concentated in the north.

> Those people haven't stopped dying

Right... they're dying from covid-19.

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#408

Post by [deleted] »

wegs wrote: post #327
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> An economy is not something that one should have to shovels lives into to keep going. I mean I want to agree in principle, but this is just an incorrect statement. It's a matter of what is a good-enough tradeoff of risk and reward. If you make people drive to work, some will die. If you want to mine lithium, some people will die in industrial accidents that wouldn't have died if you never built a lithium mine. If…

There is no trade-off. Exponential functions are pretty binary. We contain this (R0 A core problem is that we're not looking at how to mitigate damage to the economy. We can handle a month or two of the economy shutting down, no problem. You'll get your new car 2 months later. Most of the damage is auxiliary: businesses going bankrupt, people defaulting on mortgages, etc. All of that can be mitigated with the right m…

[deleted]

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#409

Post by dnautics »

panta wrote: post #286
dnautics wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also possible that Italy is vastly unlucky for some generic reason, considering most of the deaths are in a particular region of the country and among an age bracket that is less cosmopolitan and more likely to reflect limited geographic genetic dispersion.

Italian here. The most probable cause for that is that these areas started being affected earlier, so the virus had more time to spread before the lockdown.

That doesn't affect cfr, which was higher even before the hospitals got overwhelmed. I suppose it's possible that Italian doctors are just generally bad, but I doubt that.

Re: Covid-19: the harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures

#410

Post by marknutter »

alkonaut wrote: post #299
2008guy wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But prove that this matters. How many people are in that group? Is it not possible to quarantine the workers?

Prove that what matters? That they meet tons of working age people? As you say you can expand the circle of isolation. All the at-risk patients (Say people over 65 and all adults with preexisting conditions). Then you isolate those people that they have to interact with. For example all staff at all nursing homes where any such person lives. But you quickly end up where you started. All the people who work in all the…

Then test the caregivers too. That's still far less difficult than quarantining everyone.
Post reply on HN