WHO raises concerns about how Toronto's SARS cases are counted

Canadian Press (via canada.com) ^ | May 28, 2003 | HELEN BRANSWELL

[EternalHope]

WHO raises concerns about how Toronto's SARS cases are counted

HELEN BRANSWELL Canadian Press

Wednesday, May 28, 2003

TORONTO (CP) - The World Health Organization has raised concerns about a method of determining probable SARS cases adopted by the Ontario government earlier this week, a method which is having the impact of downplaying the size of the current outbreak in Toronto.

The concerns were raised in a teleconference with Health Canada officials Wednesday. During the call, officials in Ottawa told their WHO counterparts that Health Canada planned to devise a new definition that would be more sensitive and would better reflect the scope of the outbreak.

"We have given advice to Health Canada - because they asked for it - that they should have a sensitive case definition," Dr. Denise Werker, a medical officer on the global response team of the WHO's communicable diseases section, said from Geneva.

Does that mean Health Canada's existing definition, which was only adopted by Ontario on Monday, is not sensitive enough, Werker was asked.

"Correct," she replied.

"In the discussion that has just happened with Health Canada, we have advised them that . . . it would be prudent for them to have a case definition that is more sensitive than the one that they have currently."

Health Canada informed the WHO that a change is in the works, Werker added.

"What we have been told by Health Canada is that they are thinking about changing their case definition . . . to something that is more sensitive. To be more inclusive. They're talking about that now."

Concerns over the criteria being used to determine who is a probable SARS case came to light Wednesday when one of the leading doctors on Ontario's SARS containment team said using the new system was painting a false picture of the extent of the problem in Toronto.

The size of the caseload of new probable patients would be in "the 30s," not nine as currently stated, if officials were using the same yardstick today as they used in March and April, said Dr. Donald Low, chief microbiologist at Mount Sinai Hospital.

The switch was made only after public health officials recognized that a new large outbreak had been allowed to fester, undetected, for weeks in two city hospitals and they were faced with again announcing double digit SARS caseloads.

MORE LATER

© Copyright 2003 The Canadian Press

[EternalHope]

Ahem... They didn't "lie".

They just changed the definitions in order to make themselves look better.

[aristeides]

I wonder if the WHO has people reading our threads.

[blam]

"I wonder if the WHO has people reading our threads."

We're days ahead of them.

[flamefront]

If WHO really cared for anything but political spin and panic avoidance, they would read here. But they wouldn't need too in that case.

Who trusts WHO?

Toronto is now a big egg on their faces.

[Dog Gone]

Last Thursday, Toronto said they had two cases. Now, it's somewhere in the low 30s, but they admit to 9.

I don't see any way to spin this as a minor problem.

[IYAAYAS]

I just lifted this little gem from the Canadian Ministry of Health: Family members, of healthy people who are in isolation, do not need to stay home because there is no risk they can transmit SARS.

Pondering that I understand that they can't quarantine everyone. But, considering a possible >10 day incubation period we're screwed.

[Prince Charles]

"In the discussion that has just happened with Health Canada, we have advised them that . . . it would be prudent for them to have a case definition that is more sensitive than the one that they have currently."

Try changing the rules like that in a poker game and you'll be lucky to just get yelled at.