Live data from Hacker News

Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

news.psu.edu

81–90 of 210 posts

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#81

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

> The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty

Oh? Our local hospital recently had to take overflow from a neighboring county.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#82
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something worth keeping in mind is how many fewer people died of other causes compared to previous years [1]. Yes, the data will show an excess number of people died versus previous years but I believe the parent comment is saying we should pay close attention to what the cause of death really means in terms of age and comorbidity. [1] https://i.imgur.com/HfaMhcK.jpg

One further thing to bear in mind here is that some causes of death can be expected to be decreased on account of lockdowns e.g. accidents - less people out and about, less people driving etc. will naturally lead to less accidents. Of course on the flip side, more people stuck at home & using the time to do renovation work etc. could lead to an increase in e.g. power tool related accidents. Other causes of death such…

Contrariwise, people are avoiding treatment for other illnesses for fear of catching COVID in a hospital. Many people are depressed or even suicidal. And people are less active, which aggravates other health problems. All of these factors could increase the number of deaths.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is something worth researching, but even then, it's still justifiable to count a death by fear as a death by pandemic, given that it wouldn't have happened without the pandemic.

You can have a pandemic without fear though.

Really? Has there ever been one? Or is the fear a natural human response to an invisible, omnipresent killer?

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#84
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One further thing to bear in mind here is that some causes of death can be expected to be decreased on account of lockdowns e.g. accidents - less people out and about, less people driving etc. will naturally lead to less accidents. Of course on the flip side, more people stuck at home & using the time to do renovation work etc. could lead to an increase in e.g. power tool related accidents. Other causes of death such…

Contrariwise, people are avoiding treatment for other illnesses for fear of catching COVID in a hospital. Many people are depressed or even suicidal. And people are less active, which aggravates other health problems. All of these factors could increase the number of deaths.

If it was significant in comparison, we would not see a sharp drop in deaths after the lockdowns.

Do people get depressed and die because of a lovkdown? Sure, I got depressed as well. But the numbers show that this issue is far less than the number of people that would die otherwise.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that obviously depends on where 'around you' is. Compare to New York City, where there have been an estimated 17,000 deaths (and even that's probably undercounted, going by some studies of excess deaths compared to previous years), and at the peak there were hundreds of unclaimed bodies per week being buried in mass graves.

This is completely anecdotal, but my good friend’s brother is an ER doctor. He said the hospital required them to label the cause of death for all patients in the hospital as covid if there was as much as one symptom. I don’t want to downplay the sadness of the deaths, but I think it is a bit foolish for us to base our number of deaths of off untested patients...

[deleted]

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#86

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

People want this thing to be over, so there's a desire to find reasons to believe that we are further along than we thought. Combined with this being a novel disease that no one fully understands, there's a lot of room for those theories to develop. The current best science answer to how many people remain susceptible to infection is "nobody really knows but our best guess is not to assume the best case without bette…

> - The disease is astronomically worse for elderly people. One study said that for young person, getting COVID was as risky as going for a ~200 mile car drive but as a 90 year old it was as risky as flying a WWII bomber mission

Interesting comparison. So here we're talking about the risk of dying from Covid-19. What about the risk of becoming seriously ill? What I'm curious is about is the percentage of people (younger or otherwise) who either develop no symptoms or develop symptoms so mild as to not be attributed to the virus. Do such people exist?

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#87
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then we get to the question of whether those deaths were caused by COVID or other causes. We know that traffic fatalities in some areas have risen drastically due to the lockdowns: https://abc7.com/traffic-fatalities-california-highway-patro... We also know that doctor visits have gone down due to the coronavirus, leading to medical staff being laid off: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/02/826232…

You are conflating a lot of different things. Traffic fatalities were actually down overall (total numbers), but up per mile driven . In other words, people were driving much less and dying in lower total numbers, but the people who were driving were driving faster and thus a bit more likely to die. That article is poorly written to generate headlines and clicks. Arguing over a specific IFR is also kind of pointless…

> and not deadly at all if you are 15

Very low risk, but not no risk.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#88
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How you label the deaths is not that big of a deal in the larger scale. If you want to know the true toll of the epidemic, just look at this year's deaths vs. an average of previous years. It's simple and transparent. Here's that data for England: https://imgur.com/sxoolBX I get why everyone is questioning everything, but there isn't some big conspiracy here. Lots of people died of COVID. Most of them were 80+. You p…

But then we get to the question of whether those deaths were caused by COVID or other causes. We know that traffic fatalities in some areas have risen drastically due to the lockdowns: https://abc7.com/traffic-fatalities-california-highway-patro... We also know that doctor visits have gone down due to the coronavirus, leading to medical staff being laid off: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/02/826232…

There is no wiggle room. The fucking deaths doubled. This is just FUD.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#89

History books will not be kind to our past and present handling of covid-19. Incurring incredible economic and social damage without fully understanding the threat. It’s been very clear for some time that covid is not nearly as lethal as once feared AND even more clear that we over quarantined. In the UK we have hospitals built specifically for covid that are completely unused. This isn’t flattening the curve, it’s c…

> we have hospitals built specifically for covid that are completely unused.

Only the London nightingale went "unused", and that's because government is pursuing herd immunity by discharging older people to care and nursing homes, not to the Nightingale.

It wasn't "completely" unused.

And the other Nightingales were pretty full.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#90
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are aware that despite the world very best efforts, almost 500.000 people have already died, and in many parts of the world, its actually not slowing down, but speeding up?

These numbers would be much more useful if they were in pairs; (#people, #avg_years_lost). https://abcnews.go.com/Health/swine-flu-h1n1-pandemic-deaths... "Though the virus was deadly, the swine flu pandemic is still considered to have been a fairly mild one. The CDC calculates that up to 575,000 people may have died from H1N1 in 2009. The WHO estimates that the seasonal flu kills up to 500,000 people each year. Both…

You're counting covid-19 and flu death differently.

For covid-19 you're using numbers of people who were confirmed with a test to have had covid; for flu you're looking at complex statistical modelling.

Post reply on HN