Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there had been no mitigation efforts the death toll would have skyrocketed as our healthcare systems collapsed.
And know that...how? Because "correlation = causation" is a legitimate scientific hypothesis now? Any legitimate scientific study has things like control groups to verify that the studied action wouldn't have happened otherwise, something I learned if high school biology in the first week. Your statement has none of that. And, any time you do look at places with NPIs vs non NPIs (Jutland in Denmark, or compare FL and…
Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
171–180 of 387 posts
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#172This isn't a "study", it's a statistical model. It reflects the assumptions put into it. To wit: > Our analysis follows four key steps. First, for all locations where weekly or monthly all-cause mortality has been reported since the start of the pandemic, we estimate how much mortality increased compared to the expected death rate....Second, based on a range of studies and consideration of other evidence, we estimate…
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
> for now we assume that total COVID-19 deaths equal excess mortality. This part is especially doubtful for me, as there are factors moving it in either direction. For one, the pandemic measures also helped a lot for things like the flu, which had less cases and therefore caused less deaths. On the other hand, problems caused by lack of exercise and social interaction have definitely increased. Lastly, I'm quite sure…
Some more factors might be hospital crowding early in the pandemic, people avoiding medical treatment, and increased homicide rates.
People avoiding medical treatment is awkward in the figures, because - medical treatment sometimes kills people. First link I found suggests that medical treatments cause 800,000 deaths per year in the USA.
If medical treatments are really down, I'd guess we might actually expect mortality figures to be temporarily down (but, higher later).
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
Numerous problems. 1. The current death toll is with the existing lockdowns. There are good reasons to think that without (especially the early) lockdowns the death toll could have been way higher. 2. Being dead for 1 year cannot be equivalently compared to being socially distant for 1 year (not 2). Is that not obvious? 3. This is before we get into life long disability, etc. due to covid. I know someone whose parent…
Correct, all valid points. But we can assign numbers to all these things and the error bars are sufficiently large that there is ample room for debate. As for 2. is it obvious? My niece doesn't know that there are other humans like her, I would gladly take a year at the end of my life to give that gift to her. Given the current vaccination rates, many people will not see normal until 2022. For 3. it cuts both ways, h…
I'm not sure she is going to agree with you when she visits you toward the end of your life.
> For 3. it cuts both ways, how many new alcoholic parents and child abuse that ruins an entire lifetime?
It's far from obvious what the effects of COVID-19 are on child abuse. The data is hard to disaggregate because there are so many conflicting factors, but there isn't obvious reason to believe that child abuse is up during the pandemic given the data we have seen: https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2021/03/419961/child-abuse-surges-...
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely you'd agree that "2020 excess deaths are going to be predominantly covid" is a very reasonable hypothesis though, right? And you agree that "2020 has an extraordinarily high excess death rate", because that part is easily measured data, right? Basically: your response seems a bit nitpicky to me, which tells me that perhaps you're starting from a perspective where you're assuming the article is wrong and lookin…
> Surely you'd agree that "2020 excess deaths are going to be predominantly covid" is a very reasonable hypothesis though, right? And you agree that "2020 has an extraordinarily high excess death rate", because that part is easily measured data, right? I don't know the answer, and neither do you. But given that the top-line is asserting that there are 900k excess deaths due to Covid, the choice of assumption here is…
Please list them.
We have data about deaths going back many decades. It's very safe to say that if in 2010 you made a prediction about the number of expected deaths in 2011, you would have been very close to the real number. Same if you had predicted the deaths for 2019 in 2018.
Suddenly, after decades and decades of being almost perfect in your predictions, you would have been wildly wrong for the predicted number of deaths in 2020.
After decades of predictability, there was a whopping 20% increase in 2020 [1]. How can you possibly say it wasn't caused by Covid?
[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there had been no mitigation efforts the death toll would have skyrocketed as our healthcare systems collapsed.
I doubt that. People would naturally follow social distancing protocols (out of fear for their own lives). They would still hang out, but less and more in the open, and still go to the doctor, but less and only for the necessary issues. Literally the only place where "healthcare systems collapsed" (in the West) was Italy, which was caught completely unprepared. There's a sensible middle ground between life-as-normal…
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#177This isn't a "study", it's a statistical model. It reflects the assumptions put into it. To wit: > Our analysis follows four key steps. First, for all locations where weekly or monthly all-cause mortality has been reported since the start of the pandemic, we estimate how much mortality increased compared to the expected death rate....Second, based on a range of studies and consideration of other evidence, we estimate…
> for now we assume that total COVID-19 deaths equal excess mortality. This seems reasonable, although I'd suggest it's an underestimate of COVID-19 deaths. Excess deaths counts have been consistently showing negative in countries during periods of time where they have coronavirus under control. Other significant causes of death (including suicide, influenza, road traffic accidents) appear to be down. As such, I'd as…
Here's the sum total of evidence provided:
> An analysis by the Netherlands statistical agency suggested that all excess deaths in the Netherlands were directly due to COVID-19
So they use a single study out of Europe to extrapolate here.
> The second driver of excess mortality is reduced health care utilization for many causes;3 however, the impact of reduced health care use on health outcomes is harder to prove. Many mechanisms have been proposed, including reduced vaccination rates and reduced births in hospital.4 Demonstrated increases in cause-specific mortality related to these causes, however, have not yet been verified. The impact of changes in health care utilization on excess mortality may be observed in later years, rather than in 2020 or the first quarter of 2021.
So they dismiss this.
> Third, convincing evidence has been found that rates of anxiety and depression have increased, which might in turn lead to increases in deaths from suicide.5 To date, the evidence on increased suicide is very limited.6 Opioid deaths, on the other hand, have clearly increased7 in the United States. Compared to past trends, opioid deaths increased by around 15,000 since March 2020. Evidence on whether this has also occurred in other countries awaits further study.
So again, they dismiss this.
> Fourth, we reviewed the evidence on decreases in injuries as a result of reductions in mobility. We analyzed data from 12 countries that provide cause of death data by week or month, which allows us to test whether some causes decreased significantly during 2020 and whether that decrease was related to the decreases in mobility that have been reported. This analysis suggests that globally, injury mortality decreased by 5% in 2020 due to reductions in mobility. At the global level, this translates into a reduction of approximately 215,000 deaths.
Conveniently, when then assumption works out in their favor, they include it in the model.
> Fifth, some infectious causes of death may have declined during the pandemic due to the behavioral changes associated with control of the pandemic, including mask use and reduced contact with others. Causes that have clearly declined are influenza,8,9 respiratory syncytial virus,10 measles,11 and possibly other respiratory viruses and viral diarrheas. For example, influenza cases in the United States declined 99.3% from the winter season of 2019–2020 to the winter season of 2020–2021. Combining the reductions reported in different countries in influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and measles, the global reduction in mortality from these causes may be larger than 400,000 deaths.
Again, when the assumption works in their favor, they include it.
> Sixth, deaths from some chronic conditions such as ischemic heart disease or chronic respiratory disease declined in some months of 2020, most notably in May and June in Europe. These declines were most likely due to the fact that frail individuals who died from COVID-19 earlier in the year would otherwise likely have died from these chronic conditions. The strongest evidence for this effect is that excess mortality was negative in some countries in Europe in June when the reported COVID-19 death rate was very low. In aggregate, this effect likely reduced mortality by only 2% based on our analysis.
This is so egregious as to be laughable...they find evidence for something, and then "based on their analysis", limit the effects.
> The main potential increases in excess mortality due to deferred care and increases in drug overdose and depression are hard to quantify at this point or are of a much smaller magnitude. Given that there is insufficient evidence to estimate these contributions to excess mortality, for now we assume that total COVID-19 deaths equal excess mortality.
So they didn't even try.
Again...I don't know what the right answer is here, but this is, at best, a biased reading of the available data. All you can do is throw up your hands and go back to first principles: without prospective validation, statistical models are fiction.
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
> for now we assume that total COVID-19 deaths equal excess mortality. This part is especially doubtful for me, as there are factors moving it in either direction. For one, the pandemic measures also helped a lot for things like the flu, which had less cases and therefore caused less deaths. On the other hand, problems caused by lack of exercise and social interaction have definitely increased. Lastly, I'm quite sure…
I would generally expect non-covid deaths to be down as is indicated by correlations between mortality and economic decline, the fact that suicides haven't trended substantially upwards, and the fact that cars are off the road.
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Something to consider if you see anyone trying to downplay this. Most of the downplaying I've seen has revolved around the idea that those who died would have, "died anyway" from some other ailment or that hospitals are finding any reason they can to attribute deaths to covid. So, while you have a great argument, I doubt you'll change any minds because those who disagree flat out reject your premise.
For the former, if someone is actually willing to listen to evidence, you can cite them numbers of average years of life lost per covid death (~15).
https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/obesity-and-covid-19.html
And they also reduce life expectancy on their own even without COVID-19. Being obese cuts life expectancy by about 7 years.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12513041/
So the actual average YLL is probably a little less than 15.
I don't blame the researchers for this bias. The detailed data to correct for it generally isn't available so they're doing their best with what they have.
Re: Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19
#180This isn't a "study", it's a statistical model. It reflects the assumptions put into it. To wit: > Our analysis follows four key steps. First, for all locations where weekly or monthly all-cause mortality has been reported since the start of the pandemic, we estimate how much mortality increased compared to the expected death rate....Second, based on a range of studies and consideration of other evidence, we estimate…
> for now we assume that total COVID-19 deaths equal excess mortality. This seems reasonable, although I'd suggest it's an underestimate of COVID-19 deaths. Excess deaths counts have been consistently showing negative in countries during periods of time where they have coronavirus under control. Other significant causes of death (including suicide, influenza, road traffic accidents) appear to be down. As such, I'd as…