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

251–260 of 462 posts

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

#251

Post by ChrisCinelli »

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…

I heard that in US if somebody dies and had pre-existing conditions the pre-existing condition is usually the official cause of death. So the person is not count.

This has to be even more true with flu. If somebody had lung problems and the flu season makes things worse and she ends up dying, the doctors are not normally going to test for flu. And the cause of death is not going to be "flu".

What I am trying to convey is that both numerator and denominator of the death ratio are very noisy since they depend on who and when is tested.

I have been trying to understand for a few days how the numbers are really counted for COVID-19. And again, it pretty clear that we do not have the real data for a "normal" flu either.

So for now my understanding of how bad COVID-19 is compared to "standard" flu has been largely inconclusive.

One thing though started getting clearer. COVID-19 is a virus with no vaccine. I have largely underestimate the importance of immunizations and being in a good health. Now I started to picture more and more that without a way to keep our immune system alert against the viruses, we will be greatly screwed almost every year because the demographic at risk would inondate the health care system in a way that they cannot cope.

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

#252

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

joe_the_user wrote: post #184
jamilbk wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely agree with you, but I want to see more data. Without broad testing it’s difficult to ascertain the true death rate of the virus (many infected are asymptomatic). But my hope is we can come up with similarly effective measures (e.g. require n95 masks in public, keeping the elderly at home, offer voluntary isolated infection to low-risk individuals to increase herd immunity, etc) that can achieve both.

South Korea did extensive testing when they successfully eradicated the virus. As user rramach points out, Ioannidis cherry picks the data in many ways, including ignoring the extensive data of South Korea. Not did was Koreans' testing program extensively documented (by Korean scientific institutions, The Western press, and etc), we know they found most or the larger portion of cases because they were able to bring n…

But see, this is the kind of exaggerated information Ioannidis is concerned about. South Korea has not brought new infections and deaths down to zero.

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

#253

Post by leereeves »

rsfern wrote: post #167
Barrin92 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

he seems to advocate individual hygiene and avoiding the public when sick, which also btw seems to be the response that countries like Japan, Taiwan and Singapore have taken, where complete lockdowns or closures have largely been avoided. Together with tracing they seem to have handled the situation just fine.

> together with tracing This is key — these countries were able to avoid lockdown by testing and tracing early, before the case load became unmanageable. In the US, we’ve missed that opportunity

South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, peaked at 10,000 cases. We haven't passed that per capita case load - and even if we do, lower population density should make it easier to get the virus under control in the US (except in NYC).

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

#254

Post by BlargMcLarg »

ltbarcly3 wrote: post #215
joe_the_user wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An economy is not something that one should have to shovels lives into to keep going. And in any case, if we sacrifice all the lives this virus could take to the economy, it won't help the economy at all - the massive dislocation involved in the deaths will certainly be far worse than the shutdown, if you really want to think that way. All that said, part of the collapse of things like the stock market comes through…

>> 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…

> It's a matter of what is a good-enough tradeoff of risk and reward.

This also sounds very short-sighted. Yes, people die in a lithium mine, but in most countries, I'm the one taking the risk to become a miner or not. Understandably, the situation isn't that easy: in some countries, you may indirectly or directly be forced to risk your life for the economy. Yet often, I don't see the physical risk-takers being particularly rewarded for their risk-taking either, with few exceptions. Miners are definitely not one of them. Its a difference between who is taking the risk and who's life is on the line: I don't mind risking my own life. I do mind the government toying with it while a prime minister is sipping tea in his comfy seat.

Reality is, the current economy is maintained through exploitation in one way or another, and its fragile balance is now attacked by a force that doesn't care about our economy. Every time people bring up the economy as an argument, its abundantly clear the people in trouble either can't make a buffer, or don't have the discipline to make a buffer. It wasn't that long ago we were forced to go through harsh winters using the harvest of a possibly failed summer and autumn. Yet today, the economy is in jeopardy if a quarter of all activity is told to shut down temporarily. Why can't make people a buffer? Why aren't people making a buffer? Why aren't governments prepared for this?

Something unexpected can always happen, we're not gods nor do we have crystal balls. In a competent software industry, you'd be summoned for making a fragile software system where traffic stops coming through. Yet now we tolerate the same in regards to our economy. It really is time we take a step back and go on the defense rather than looking no further than 3 months.

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

#255

Post by danmaz74 »

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…

For those who want some indicative data of what happens in a few weeks if you don't act early, together with Italy, take a look at Spain. The health system in Madrid is already overwhelmed because the growth was incredibly fast.

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

#256

Post by fcurts »

listsfrin wrote: post #231
fbn79 wrote: post #213

"And yet it moves" Galileo Galilei https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_yet_it_moves?wprov=sfla1 . I agree that in many axpects the situation is exagerated, in primis by general panic. But If the Covid is not much worse than flu why in Italy we have military trucks convoy that transport death to southern regions because the wait line for crematory in North is becomed too long?

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?

They buried or cremated them. Unsurprisingly, the system can't handle a sudden one-of-a-kind spike.

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

#257

Post by jacobolus »

dnautics wrote: post #227
divbzero wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By John’s numbers (0.3% die and 1% of population) Italy should get a total of 1800 deaths. Yet Italy is at 6000 and rapidly rising - using real numbers his assumptions are already wrong for a first world country that is a few weeks ahead of the rest of the world. Just highlighting this bit of the parent’s post. If you want hard evidence that COVID-19 is quantitatively and qualitatively different from other coronavi…

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.

I suppose central China, northern Italy, Iran, Spain, the rest of Italy, and soon enough France, Germany, New York City, Israel, followed by plenty of other places just happen to be vastly unlucky for “some generic reason”.

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

#258

Post by hef19898 »

drno123 wrote: post #245
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If 10% of the population needs ICU and dies because they cant get it, then there is no business as usual.

In Italy, median age of people who have died of Corona is 83 for women and 79 for men [1]. Normal life expectancy is lower than that in the United States [2]. Lockdown measures will have severe impact on GDP, and GDP is correlated with life expectancy [3]. It can easily happen that by killing economy in order to save lives, we may actually be doing the opposite in the long term. [1] https://www.iss.it/web/guest//comu…

The US might not be the best country to benchmark other developed countries against, so.

Personnaly, I have issues with people using economic data, read money, to define the value of other peoples lives.

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

#259

Post by fcurts »

irq11 wrote: post #183
amykyta wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot on. Too many comments are see-sawing on details of parameters and trade offs but just talk to a doctor in NYC, they are out of room in ICUs and terrified about triaging that will start taking place.

Mt. Sinai in NYC is not currently reporting shortages of any kind. They are preparing for shortages, but are not currently experiencing them: https://www.westsiderag.com/2020/03/23/mt-sinai-setting-up-o... Perhaps you want to reconsider your news sources.

Hospitals in Italy are currently reporting dramatic shortages of many kinds.

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

#260

Post by pibi »

drno123 wrote: post #245
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If 10% of the population needs ICU and dies because they cant get it, then there is no business as usual.

In Italy, median age of people who have died of Corona is 83 for women and 79 for men [1]. Normal life expectancy is lower than that in the United States [2]. Lockdown measures will have severe impact on GDP, and GDP is correlated with life expectancy [3]. It can easily happen that by killing economy in order to save lives, we may actually be doing the opposite in the long term. [1] https://www.iss.it/web/guest//comu…

Normal life expectancy is lower than that in the United States

I read on your link that average life expectancy in Italy is 83.4, about 4 years more than US (at 78.9). So I don't get your point unless you are speaking about the age structure: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_age_str...

Post reply on HN