Posted on 03/17/2020 4:55:05 PM PDT by GOPmember
The current coronavirus disease, Covid-19, has been called a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco.
At a time when everyone needs better information, from disease modelers and governments to people quarantined or just social distancing, we lack reliable evidence on how many people have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 or who continue to become infected. Better information is needed to guide decisions and actions of monumental significance and to monitor their impact.
Draconian countermeasures have been adopted in many countries. If the pandemic dissipates — either on its own or because of these measures — short-term extreme social distancing and lockdowns may be bearable. How long, though, should measures like these be continued if the pandemic churns across the globe unabated? How can policymakers tell if they are doing more good than harm?
Vaccines or affordable treatments take many months (or even years) to develop and test properly. Given such timelines, the consequences of long-term lockdowns are entirely unknown.
The data collected so far on how many people are infected and how the epidemic is evolving are utterly unreliable. Given the limited testing to date, some deaths and probably the vast majority of infections due to SARS-CoV-2 are being missed. We don’t know if we are failing to capture infections by a factor of three or 300. Three months after the outbreak emerged, most countries, including the U.S., lack the ability to test a large number of people and no countries have reliable data on the prevalence of the virus in a representative random sample of the general population.
(Excerpt) Read more at statnews.com ...
“ But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco.”
Roger that.
Many pedaling in the hysteria reside on Free Republic. Stunning to see the stripping of personal and economic freedoms by our politicians, and many on this site being perfectly ok with it.
Come on man. Tom Hanks and his wife are going to be okay! Seriously, how come the media is not reporting this? Is it because that kind of good news does not fit their template of panic pushing? I thought liberals worshiped celebrities.
But, regardless of the number of deaths and the number of positive tests reported to date, the main problems seem to be:
1) We don't know the true denominator. In other words, it we have no true grasp on how many people become infected and go about their lives without incident (or, in many cases, unrecognizable symptoms).
Even the current data show that, for those less than 50 years of age, the mortality rate is effectively zero percent… despite the fact that the selective bias of the present data is enormous.
That doesn't mean that you should avoid washing your hands and that you should start sneezing in the faces of your co-workers. This virus is spread primarily via droplet contamination, just are many other respiratory viruses. But, even the data that are currently available don’t warrant the entire western world's population assuming the life of hermits.
If the vast majority of non-elderly patients infected with this virus have no complications, and if the R-naught for SARS-CoV-2 is reasonably high, many, many more positive test results will occur as testing expands.
Those recent high profile positive cases (Tom Hanks, et al) likely only underwent testing in the time of limited test availability because they were "important" people who had access to testing. Most of the patients in the US who are currently being tested are ill enough to be in a hospital…regardless of whether or not their illness is actually COVID-19.
As testing of minimally-symptomatic regular Joes escalates with increased testing availability, expect the "case numbers" to go through the roof. That will cause the case fatality rate to plummet, as the denominator skyrockets.
But, while such data should normally be reassuring, the media chickens will undoubtedly misuse this information and declare that the sky is now falling even faster than before.
2) Numerous respiratory viruses lead to potentially deadly complications in the most vulnerable members of the population. The evidence doesn't seem to be there (? yet) to prove that the SARS-CoV-2 is any more likely to cause deadly complications than have been any other strains of coronavirus (or other respiratory viruses, for that matter).
4) How many of the dead truly died directly due to complications directly attributable to complications caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection? How many died of bacterial pneumonia and/or ARDS caused by a non-respiratory infection, yet also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2?
I have yet to see any information suggesting what criteria were used in determining that SARS-CoV-2 was the proven cause of death in any of the reported COVID-19 cases. If anyone has this information from a reliable source, please share.
You are absolutely right
Very good point since the flu death estimates include all deaths involving upper respiratory infections even if they have not been confirmed as the flu.
As far as the denominator question, I have been posting the following advisement from the Worldometer site:
How to calculate the mortality rate during an outbreak
At present, it is tempting to estimate the case fatality rate by dividing the number of known deaths by the number of confirmed cases. The resulting number, however, does not represent the true case fatality rate and might be off by orders of magnitude [...]
A precise estimate of the case fatality rate is therefore impossible at present.
2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV): estimating the case fatality rate – a word of caution - Battegay Manue et al., Swiss Med Wkly, February 7, 2020
The case fatality rate (CFR) represents the proportion of cases who eventually die from a disease.
Once an epidemic has ended, it is calculated with the formula: deaths / cases.
But while an epidemic is still ongoing, as it is the case with the current novel coronavirus outbreak, this formula is, at the very least, "naïve" and can be "misleading if, at the time of analysis, the outcome is unknown for a non negligible proportion of patients." [8]
(Methods for Estimating the Case Fatality Ratio for a Novel, Emerging Infectious Disease - Ghani et al, American Journal of Epidemiology)
In other words, current deaths belong to a total case figure of the past, not to the current case figure in which the outcome (recovery or death) of a proportion (the most recent cases) hasn't yet been determined.
Hoping it helps to calm down some who get overly excited about the current death rate statistics.
Regards.
“...I have yet to see any information suggesting what criteria were used in determining that SARS-CoV-2 was the proven cause of death in any of the reported COVID-19 cases. If anyone has this information from a reliable source, please share.”
*****************************************
I haven’t seen that information from ANY source...whether reliable or unreliable. I think I recall a wise person saying something like “Maybe it would be more accurate to say many of these elderly and very sick died ‘with the Novel Coronavirus’ and not necessarily strictly because of it.” It could have been a FReeper who said that.
But we have had no shortage of people on these boards promoting unnecessary hysteria, IMHO.
maybe the lack of testing is deliberate....TPTB KNOW what vast testing will show.....instead, obfuscate and close the country down.....
except they want ALL of us to shut down instead of the vulnerable group( and I’m one of them).....on the way , destroying so many millions of families....
I would have been more impressed if Tom Hanks had died from the covid....I seriously doubt he had it at all....
I don’t accept your narrative.
The economy would be crap regardless of what the government does.
Do you honestly think if the government did nothing and let the disease spread uncontrollably the economy would just be fine?
Yep - as panic increases, some opt to take truly draconian measures and others are forced to follow suit so the lawyers don’t eat them up in the aftermath....
He makes an interesting point about keeping the schools open so that kids, who are less affected by this virus, can help develop herd immunity. Also, they will have less contact with elderly relatives.
What happened to 3?
Seriously in reviewing the available data from the CDC and other sources, the data isn’t there in the detail you’re asking for.. The H1N1 data from 2010 is still quoted in ranges. The cases often quoted as 60 million, is a range from 40 to over 100 million US cases. The numerator of 12,000 deaths is also the midpoint of the 8,800 to 18,800 range.
I believe that there is no evidence that this virus is more lethal than the normal flu viruses annually would be without vaccines and drugs. And it doesn’t seem to be much different than the last novel H1N1 when it appeared in 2009.
Of course that is not the current view which is basing everything on worst case scenarios ( Italy ).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.