Live data from Hacker News

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

onlinelibrary.wiley.com

21–30 of 462 posts

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

#21

Common sense needs to prevail over mania, numbers over hyperbole and science over conjecture. But even then, this is hard if our data is collected poorly and then poorly disseminated. So what is the answer then? Maybe a strengthening of resolve against all forms of panic? Is there a single event in history has been solved by panic?

> Is there a single event in history has been solved by panic?

What does that mean? "Panic" is not a strategy, it's an instinctive response to fear.

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

#22
Ioannidis continues to push this evidence-based approach, but I have not yet seen an adequate response to critics such as Nassim Taleb or Yaneer Bar-Yam. They argue that one doesn't need raw evidence to act if the statistical evidence shows that the risks are catastrophic. They published a paper on January 26th which lays out arguments for why conventional risk management approaches are inadequate in these situations. [1]

This paper was met with disregard on HN [2], but the persistent reach of Ioannidis shows why Taleb's arguments have value.

Some on Twitter argue that the WHO statement on January 14th shows where Ioannidis' approach fails: "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission..." [3] Authorities were looking for evidence before taking any action.

[1] https://necsi.edu/systemic-risk-of-pandemic-via-novel-pathog...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22154333

[3] https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152

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

#23

Common sense needs to prevail over mania, numbers over hyperbole and science over conjecture. But even then, this is hard if our data is collected poorly and then poorly disseminated. So what is the answer then? Maybe a strengthening of resolve against all forms of panic? Is there a single event in history has been solved by panic?

The craziest stat I heard today was on my local news, and it was about COVID19 in the county, Davidson County (Nashville, TN,) they said of all the active cases in the county only 2 had been hospitalized. That's out of 163. The others were sent home to be quarantined and medicated. I was floored. Why are stats like that not shared? That seems like very valuable information. Hospitalization rates should be one of the…

It doesn't seem like hospitalization rates are being as consistently tracked. Or if they are, not disseminated. My state's official page tracks changes daily, but doesn't include hospitalizations.

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

#24

Common sense needs to prevail over mania, numbers over hyperbole and science over conjecture. But even then, this is hard if our data is collected poorly and then poorly disseminated. So what is the answer then? Maybe a strengthening of resolve against all forms of panic? Is there a single event in history has been solved by panic?

Does 'panic' mean 'reacting to a problem with a severity of response that is proportionate to how big of a problem it will be in the future, rather than how big of a problem it is now'?

Probably many problems have been solved by this.

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

#25
Sadly, my takeaway/tl:dr Everything you've heard or read is fake news, we know almost nothing. Ironically uses 'gone viral' when he crits a fellow doc (cite 12) on the mask 'issue', and clearly we can't even get these experienced pros on this very topic to agree on much of anything, but will print regardless.

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

#26

Common sense needs to prevail over mania, numbers over hyperbole and science over conjecture. But even then, this is hard if our data is collected poorly and then poorly disseminated. So what is the answer then? Maybe a strengthening of resolve against all forms of panic? Is there a single event in history has been solved by panic?

The craziest stat I heard today was on my local news, and it was about COVID19 in the county, Davidson County (Nashville, TN,) they said of all the active cases in the county only 2 had been hospitalized. That's out of 163. The others were sent home to be quarantined and medicated. I was floored. Why are stats like that not shared? That seems like very valuable information. Hospitalization rates should be one of the…

hospitalization rates are being shared. IIRC, they are generally around 20% of confirmed cases, but the testing rate is low here so hard to know the true numbers

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

#27
There was a comment on HN a few days ago basically saying, "what's wrong with panic, maybe we should be panicking" and I just found that comment frightening. We mock all the "idiots" buying up the toilet paper, but panic clouds the clear thinking of even the "intelligent". It can absolutely effect our leaders and medical professionals.

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

#29

Let's check back on this piece in...2 weeks, say, when there are 10,000+ Corona deaths in the US. Well see how it ages then. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/21/upshot/corona... 427× 16 =11102

China quarantined 700 million of its citizens for fun and it still killed thousands. I'm sure that they regret the policies they implemented right now as they've finally gotten a hold of the outbreak.

Edit: I was being sarcastic here. China messed up the initial response but their draconian tactics worked well.

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

#30
I am worried there is a fine line between 'realism' and a backlash against care for the elderly and chronically ill.

When people realise that their earnings have been slashed, they have been burdened with years of increased taxes, the economy has plunged, and swathes of businesses have gone bust, for the sake of people who were going to die soon anyway...

Realism is good. But it is easy to 'evidence' biased anti-vulnerable feeling with 'realism'. I'm not convinced that if most people understood the realistic risk to themselves, they would do what's necessary to protect the people at much greater risk. The last week of the 'let's be realistic' zeitgeist on the news comment thread I visit.

As usual with such pessimism, I really hope I'm wrong.

Post reply on HN