Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

corona-transition.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#41

Post by BearsAreCool »

https443 wrote: post #38
BearsAreCool wrote: post #24

DISCLAIMER: I initially did not have access to the original presentation. The original presentation is far better from what I can tell compared to how it has been represented in both right wing and left wing media at presenting their claims with nuance that has largely been left out of other reports. Many of the conclusions drawn in the paper and in articles reporting on it are overblown or misleading on their own. T…

> overblown, misleading, and potentially outright lies I agree with you that her claims could be wrong, but please watch the original source material ( https://youtu.be/3TKJN61aflI ) - I think she is being much more nuanced that you're giving her credit for. She is presenting her findings, showing exactly how she did it, and asking for feedback ("I hope I hear more from people who have done more than me" - 43:10). Yo…

I hadn't actually found the original source material! I've amended my post to considerably tone down my accusations since it appears I was working with an incomplete picture of what the original presentation was. After an initial flicking through of the presentation it definitely appears that this is more nuanced than what I was working with and what has been reported on!

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#42

Post by frockington1 »

owenversteeg wrote: post #25

One thing I find very interesting is the effect of other factors on the total number of deaths. For example, the 2008 recession was linked with over 260,000 excess deaths from cancer alone [0]. All of the things associated with a lockdown - high stress, decreased social contact, less movement, less economic activity - are also associated with serious increases in other deaths. At what point does a lockdown have negat…

The positive side to a stubborn scientific community are the money making opportunities it presents. For those who were able to get past the doom and gloom of the media and scientific communities 2020 has been a fantastic year of growth

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#43

Post by Pyramus »

owenversteeg wrote: post #25

One thing I find very interesting is the effect of other factors on the total number of deaths. For example, the 2008 recession was linked with over 260,000 excess deaths from cancer alone [0]. All of the things associated with a lockdown - high stress, decreased social contact, less movement, less economic activity - are also associated with serious increases in other deaths. At what point does a lockdown have negat…

The study you cited doesn't really support your point - it basically says the 260k deaths would have been preventable with basic universal healthcare in place:

> "In countries with UHC—defined in the study as [...]—the link between unemployment and excess cancer deaths disappeared, suggesting that greater access to health care played a key role in mitigating the problem."

If you are really interested in the effect of lockdown on public health my suggestion is to decouple your thinking from American politics and view it as a global problem. How did lockdown affect public health in {China, South Korea, Italy, Germany, etc.}? As a counter-example, how did Sweden fare?

> I really hope that statisticians are able to look past their own personal convictions and look at possible ways our assumptions may have been incorrect.

This is pretty vague, what do you mean?

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#44

Post by TMWNN »

mox1 wrote: post #8

So eventually we are going to have an answer to these questions. There is a notion of "excess deaths" ( https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm ). It will be pretty hard to lie / manipulate these numbers. We (the US, probably other countries) have pretty good statistics for how many people die every year (and what killed them). We can use this historical data to estimate how many people would hav…

>We (the US, probably other countries) have pretty good statistics for how many people die every year (and what killed them).

Similarly, homicides are the only type of crime that statistics can be reliably compared across countries, because the definition of "murder" is consistent in a way that other crimes aren't.

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#45

Post by user-the-name »

https443 wrote: post #39
user-the-name wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet it is still incredibly misleading and dishonest. That should really teach you something about relying on the style of presentation for judging whether a claim is reasonable. In this case, it's garbage.

I think you're being over sensationalist. In today's world I think it's healthy to assume someone is trying to reach for the truth instead of assuming malice. She's trying to present her findings and asking for feedback. I don't think that should be demonized - we've all been wrong before. Please watch the video.

Why is the video still up, even after being shown to be wrong?

This is a subject where incorrect information is actually endangering lives. Why keep this up, when it is known to be wrong?

That, to me, implies malice. I do not see any other way to interpret that.

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#46

Post by sampo »

Narretz wrote: post #33

Where did she get the numbers of total deaths from? Does the US publish death rates during the year or only afterwards? For Europe, there's a pretty obvious excess death rate this year with two spikes: https://www.euromomo.eu/bulletins/2020-47 I would be very surprised if the same wasn't true for the US.

> Does the US publish death rates during the year or only afterwards?

At least Our World in Data website has those numbers:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-deat...

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#47

Post by jmcqk6 »

artvark11 wrote: post #12
fullstop wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had heart disease, but would have lived for five more years without being infected by covid-19, what was the primary cause of death?

Covid because the hospital gets a fat fed check everytime they handle a covid death.

This is a lie

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#48

Post by evanelias »

This post is highly misleading, and is essentially a duplicate of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25229194.

These claims are not from "Johns Hopkins" as an institution. The instructor making the claims is associated with a rolling-admission adult extension school, and the article discussing them appeared only in the general-purpose undergraduate campus student newspaper, which does not validate the scientific or academic accuracy of instructors' claims.

Disclaimer: I'm a JHU alum and former staff member of said student newspaper

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#49

Post by owenversteeg »

Pyramus wrote: post #43
owenversteeg wrote: post #25

One thing I find very interesting is the effect of other factors on the total number of deaths. For example, the 2008 recession was linked with over 260,000 excess deaths from cancer alone [0]. All of the things associated with a lockdown - high stress, decreased social contact, less movement, less economic activity - are also associated with serious increases in other deaths. At what point does a lockdown have negat…

The study you cited doesn't really support your point - it basically says the 260k deaths would have been preventable with basic universal healthcare in place: > "In countries with UHC—defined in the study as [...]—the link between unemployment and excess cancer deaths disappeared, suggesting that greater access to health care played a key role in mitigating the problem." If you are really interested in the effect of…

Sure it does, as I'm pretty sure the US does not have universal health care right now :)

Also, while many countries have (on paper) universal health care, in reality you will need to go into the private system for quality care. I am definitely a fan of universal healthcare, and it works well in many rich countries, but this is a global pandemic, not just something affecting Europe and America.

> This is pretty vague, what do you mean?

People in general - and the scientific community is no exception - have the tendency to engage in groupthink and maintain incorrect assumptions, and this pandemic has shown that very clearly. For one simple example, look at the messaging around masks: the WHO was very slow to change their response. I think it's very possible that one or more major assumptions are incorrect, for example around transmission mechanisms, the best ways to stop the spread of the virus etc, and that we should encourage a diversity of approaches.

For one example, I am shocked that the countries that are incredible coronavirus "success stories" such as Vietnam only occasionally appear in the news. They just went three entire months with zero locally transmitted cases - what can we learn from them?

Re: Johns Hopkins: Heart Disease Deaths Dropped in 2020 [pdf]

#50

Post by lazyasciiart »

owenversteeg wrote: post #49
Pyramus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The study you cited doesn't really support your point - it basically says the 260k deaths would have been preventable with basic universal healthcare in place: > "In countries with UHC—defined in the study as [...]—the link between unemployment and excess cancer deaths disappeared, suggesting that greater access to health care played a key role in mitigating the problem." If you are really interested in the effect of…

Sure it does, as I'm pretty sure the US does not have universal health care right now :) Also, while many countries have (on paper) universal health care, in reality you will need to go into the private system for quality care. I am definitely a fan of universal healthcare, and it works well in many rich countries, but this is a global pandemic, not just something affecting Europe and America. > This is pretty vague,…

Mostly we can learn that when the entire population follows recommendations to wear masks, close businesses and socially distance, those measures work. That "extreme" measures taken early, like closing all borders, can prevent asymptomatic travellers bringing it in and spreading across the country. That being willing to quarantine an entire town can cut off an outbreak early. It doesn't make a great story, because the audience is already pretty fixed in positions that will produce responses of either "no shit, guys" or "LIES".

https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/08/1070852

Post reply on HN