3 ms·

Presumably they could be under-reporting the number of infections and the number of deaths, to keep the mortality rate consistent. I don't know why they would

Presumably they could be under-reporting the number of infections and the number of deaths, to keep the mortality rate consistent. I don't know why they would do that, but they are accused of doing this kind of thing frequently. If they sat on the news of the virus for an extended period they might have known the mortality rate they needed to align with long before the rest us.

hef19898 7y ago
If Chinese authorities are under reporting both, death and infections, inorder to drive "true" mortality up that would mean there more unreported people dying in relation to people being infected compared to the reported numbers. And yet every real expert out there is telling us the opposite is more likely because only the more severe cases tend to be reported. And mortality is expected to be lower if the unreported cases are considered. Not sure why laypeople prefer to believe the contrary of what experts are telling us.
- ryanwaggoner 7y ago
  Every expert is not saying that the infection rate is much higher than the official numbers, but the death rate is reliable. They’re both unreliable and we just don’t know the true numbers. China’s reaction is not comforting though.
  - irq11 7y ago
    No, you misunderstood the parent, as well as the facts: experts are saying that the widely parroted “2%” number is an overestimate, and that the real infection rate is lower. Deaths are easy to count. Minor cases of the virus are likely the most common sort, and never show up in a hospital at all.
    - hef19898 7y ago
      Exactly that!
    - cobookman 7y ago
      Deaths are easy to count if they are counted. Local doctors have photos of more dead in the hospital than were reported by China. Numbers don’t line up based on a basic statistical analysis. Checkout these videos for reference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSIt496d82s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSIt496d82s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkF4qYdNU9Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkF4qYdNU9Y
    - ryanwaggoner 7y ago
      No, I didn’t misunderstand anything. The “real experts” are saying that the denominator (number of infected) is likely much higher than official numbers. But they are not saying that the numerator (deaths) is accurately represented by official figures. Deaths are easy to count if you only count deaths of confirmed infected people. There’s plenty of evidence that people are dying outside of the medical system, and that China is not accurately reporting all deaths from within the medical system as being caused by the virus. In short, we have no idea, and it’s very dishonest to claim that either number is remotely reliable at this point.
      - hef19898 7y ago
        Now the interesting question is which number is greater, unreported cases or unreported deaths. I'd say the number of unreported cases tends to be way higher than unreported deaths. Fits apparently epidemics in general. Also it is kind of logic. Severe cases have a bias to end up in hospitals, and to reported when they end deadly, only leaving the measuring error due to reporting issues. Less severe cases on the other hand have a tendency to end up unreported, not in the hospital. Neither deadly. Still leaves a number of never reported cases. All in all, unreported cases are likely to be higher than unreported deaths. As a result, qualitatively speaking, mortality should be lower.
        ryanwaggoner 7y ago
        I'd say the number of unreported cases tends to be way higher than unreported deaths. Of course, but that doesn’t mean that mortality will be lower. A much smaller number of unreported deaths can shift the rate upward. At a 2% mortality rate, you only need one unreported death for every 50 unreported infected to maintain the same rate. That might be laughably high or laughably low. We just don’t know. But the people in the best position to know, the Chinese government, seem to be taking this pretty damn seriously.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]

hef19898 7y ago

If Chinese authorities are under reporting both, death and infections, inorder to drive "true" mortality up that would mean there more unreported people dying in relation to people being infected compared to the reported numbers. And yet every real expert out there is telling us the opposite is more likely because only the more severe cases tend to be reported. And mortality is expected to be lower if the unreported cases are considered. Not sure why laypeople prefer to believe the contrary of what experts are telling us.

ryanwaggoner 7y ago
Every expert is not saying that the infection rate is much higher than the official numbers, but the death rate is reliable. They’re both unreliable and we just don’t know the true numbers. China’s reaction is not comforting though.
- irq11 7y ago
  No, you misunderstood the parent, as well as the facts: experts are saying that the widely parroted “2%” number is an overestimate, and that the real infection rate is lower. Deaths are easy to count. Minor cases of the virus are likely the most common sort, and never show up in a hospital at all.
  - hef19898 7y ago
    Exactly that!
  - cobookman 7y ago
    Deaths are easy to count if they are counted. Local doctors have photos of more dead in the hospital than were reported by China. Numbers don’t line up based on a basic statistical analysis. Checkout these videos for reference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSIt496d82s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSIt496d82s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkF4qYdNU9Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkF4qYdNU9Y
  - ryanwaggoner 7y ago
    No, I didn’t misunderstand anything. The “real experts” are saying that the denominator (number of infected) is likely much higher than official numbers. But they are not saying that the numerator (deaths) is accurately represented by official figures. Deaths are easy to count if you only count deaths of confirmed infected people. There’s plenty of evidence that people are dying outside of the medical system, and that China is not accurately reporting all deaths from within the medical system as being caused by the virus. In short, we have no idea, and it’s very dishonest to claim that either number is remotely reliable at this point.
    - hef19898 7y ago
      Now the interesting question is which number is greater, unreported cases or unreported deaths. I'd say the number of unreported cases tends to be way higher than unreported deaths. Fits apparently epidemics in general. Also it is kind of logic. Severe cases have a bias to end up in hospitals, and to reported when they end deadly, only leaving the measuring error due to reporting issues. Less severe cases on the other hand have a tendency to end up unreported, not in the hospital. Neither deadly. Still leaves a number of never reported cases. All in all, unreported cases are likely to be higher than unreported deaths. As a result, qualitatively speaking, mortality should be lower.
      - ryanwaggoner 7y ago
        I'd say the number of unreported cases tends to be way higher than unreported deaths. Of course, but that doesn’t mean that mortality will be lower. A much smaller number of unreported deaths can shift the rate upward. At a 2% mortality rate, you only need one unreported death for every 50 unreported infected to maintain the same rate. That might be laughably high or laughably low. We just don’t know. But the people in the best position to know, the Chinese government, seem to be taking this pretty damn seriously.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]