Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#91

Post by SomeoneFromCA » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 5:53 PM UTC

logicchains wrote: post #61

rndgermandude wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you haven't seen papers describing long-term effects, simply because the virus hasn't been around long enough for any long-term conclusions. Therefore there are no studies saying there are NO long term effects either. There are clues that long term effects/permanent effects even in mild cases may exist. E.g. some six scuba divers with mild symptoms/asymptomatic progression were checked afterwards (Innsbruck…

> Of course you haven't seen papers describing long-term effects, simply because the virus hasn't been around long enough for any long-term conclusions. So you'd support locking down based on something for which we don't have any evidence yet?

It appears however, that the whole strategy of "learning of living with Covid" might turn out to be unrealistic, we'll be forced to go for virus eradication route. NZ and TW, and partially CN did it, and they are doing very good.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#92

Post by latchkey » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 5:54 PM UTC

rndgermandude wrote: post #39

lima wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of evidence of long-term damage even in young and barely symptomatic cases - it's not a binary "dead/not dead" outcome. What if the virus causes substantial disease burden years to decades down the road? We can't know, and should take every precaution to prevent its spread.

This is a very important point. We don't know enough about long term effects yet. In the same vein, we do not even know if herd immunity really is a thing here, and what thing it would be. E.g. the guy from Hong Kong who got reinfected (first time severe symptoms, second time no symptoms) was probably infectious the second time again. Herd immunity only works if the people who are immune are not infections and theref…

Herd immunity has never happened without a vaccine.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#93

Post by qwerty1234599 » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 5:55 PM UTC

rossdavidh wrote: post #2

For comparison, from what I've read the typical annual influenza fatality rate is around 0.1% (don't know what the under-70 rate would be). So, this puts covid-19 solidly in the uncanny valley of viral mortality rates; not low enough to be "just like a flu", not high enough to justify shutting down the world. No wonder opinions on it are so divided.

Daily reminder: new respitory diseases come and go, nobody usually cares.

What makes Covid different and what caused the shutdowns was when Lombardy alone had 450 deaths a day. No regular influenza could do that.

It's not as if we decided out of thin air the virus was dangerous.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#94

Post by qwerty1234599 » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 5:56 PM UTC

noja wrote: post #85

rossdavidh wrote: post #2

For comparison, from what I've read the typical annual influenza fatality rate is around 0.1% (don't know what the under-70 rate would be). So, this puts covid-19 solidly in the uncanny valley of viral mortality rates; not low enough to be "just like a flu", not high enough to justify shutting down the world. No wonder opinions on it are so divided.

Apple and oranges. That flu fatality rate is without social distancing.

And 40% of the population getting a influenza vaccine yearly.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#95

Post by SomeoneFromCA » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 5:57 PM UTC

dx87 wrote: post #62

beervirus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> National health policy should not be based on personal outcomes. I'm not sure I understand what that even means. What should national health policy be based on?

What's best for the nation. Having blanket lockdowns with no timeline for lifting them, while also wrecking the economy because people don't want their 80+ grandma to die of covid isn't necessarily good for the country, even if it makes people feel better in the short term.

You like playing with numbers do not you? Covid becomes a very significant risk for people older than just 60, we are not talking about 80+.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#96

Post by hef19898 » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 6:00 PM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #83

What percentage of people who get the flu are asymptomatic? I think the biggest issue with covid is people spreading it who don't even know they have it. A friend of mine just happened to get a test and was found positive. The only symptom they had was a headache. Who can take a day of work because of a headache?

Stories like this are the reason for all the social disrancing measures and work from home. Not everybody can follow this of course. But those jobs that can be done from home should be done from home. And social distancing should be followed as much as possible. Sadly, people have to be forced to do so it seems.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#97

Post by SomeoneFromCA » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

rossdavidh wrote: post #2

For comparison, from what I've read the typical annual influenza fatality rate is around 0.1% (don't know what the under-70 rate would be). So, this puts covid-19 solidly in the uncanny valley of viral mortality rates; not low enough to be "just like a flu", not high enough to justify shutting down the world. No wonder opinions on it are so divided.

What you need to look is not fatality rate, but total fatalities caused by the disease. Flu kills 60000 a year max in US, Covid kills 5x that number. And it is unclear what will be a fatality rate for younger people whose organs are damaged by previous infection.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#98

Post by christophilus » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

seanbecker wrote: post #53

petertodd wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > reaching 0.4% at age 55 > This isn't good news, really, not for middle-aged-adults anyway. Overall mortality at age 55 is about 0.5%: https://www.statista.com/statistics/241572/death-rate-by-age... In general, COVID-19's IFR by age is pretty close to overall mortality. So even in unrestricted spread, limited by only herd immunity, at worst direct deaths from it would less than double your chances of dying in a ye…

> less than double your chances of dying in a year. The way this is phrased makes it sound like it's not a big deal. Doubling every individual's chance of dying within an entire generation is not something we should say lightly. Imagine if the base fatality rate was 50% rather than .5%.

Double 0.5% is 1%. Where'd you get 50%?

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#99

Post by nickthemagicman » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

conception wrote: post #26

nickthemagicman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) Need sources. This is extremely extremely extremely rare if so, and very speculative and unproven with no hard science. (2) This is also extremely extremely rare in under 70 population. Horrible things happen ALL THE TIME but there's a statistically miniscule chance of it happening to you. Everything in life is dangerous if you look at life the way you're championing. I think you might just be scared of LIFE in g…

1) long covid is still being studied, obviously, but there are many cases of it - https://bgr.com/2020/08/21/coronavirus-symptoms-long-covid-s... It’s a disease that attacks your organs, there’s going to be damage.

There's complications in ..every..single...disease.

People have died of papercut complications..

What if 'long covid' is some underlying pre-existing pathology that ANY disease could trigger.

So the question becomes are these statistically likely complications and is this directly from the covid virus.

The media is feeding you fear about 'long covid' and 'covid toes' and 'covid reinfection' and all of the other sensationalized things about Covid that people eat up like Jerry Springer.

Covid-19 and all of it's viral siblings are all solidly respiratory viruses.

Anything else you hear is speculative fear based over hyped statistically unlikely complications with unproven conclusions.

This whole pandemic is fed off of people who are just fundamentally bad at statistics and interpret every reported sensationalized account as an likely possibility and trust that the news media is unbiased, agenda less, and faithful to the truth.

Also...bgr.com is a news outlet not a science source. They make money off of fear. Do you well to look at data and think for yourself.

Re: Infection fatality rate of Covid-19 inferred from seroprevalence data [pdf]

#100

Post by dicomdan » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

SomeoneFromCA wrote: post #97

rossdavidh wrote: post #2

For comparison, from what I've read the typical annual influenza fatality rate is around 0.1% (don't know what the under-70 rate would be). So, this puts covid-19 solidly in the uncanny valley of viral mortality rates; not low enough to be "just like a flu", not high enough to justify shutting down the world. No wonder opinions on it are so divided.

What you need to look is not fatality rate, but total fatalities caused by the disease. Flu kills 60000 a year max in US, Covid kills 5x that number. And it is unclear what will be a fatality rate for younger people whose organs are damaged by previous infection.

Your math doesn’t add up.