3 ms·

It’s not better (or worse) imo, it’s simply another bias. It’s just one that moves the numbers in the direction counter to some of the other, more well discusse

It’s not better (or worse) imo, it’s simply another bias. It’s just one that moves the numbers in the direction counter to some of the other, more well discussed biases. > with somewhere that large you have decent statistics on expected rates I wouldn’t make that assumption. I can’t think of any place in the world that has the ability to collect this data with any sort of scientific rigour. It’s simply not possible at the moment, and without that you have no scientific basis to know what to expect. > Agree that this years flu analysis will be interesting, but on the overall statistics nobody competent is going to conflate them with covid-19 I wouldn’t make this assumption either. If you attribution criteria includes dying in hospital of Covid-like symptoms, then it also includes dying in hospital of flu-like symptoms, because a severe case of flu and a severe case of Covid present almost identical symptoms. The US has had ~55k Covid attributed deaths so far, in last years flu season, it had ~35k flu attributed deaths. The potential for misattribution on that basis alone is significant. The general point I was making was that not all of the confounding factors apply downward pressure to the stats, some of the provide upward pressure, and depending on methodology, you’re going to get a different set of confounding factors from place to place.

ska 7y ago
I’m not disagreeing with you that their are confounding factors in both directions, this is clearly true. I’m disagreeing that at this moment - and with statistics like excess mortality in NYC, there is very good reason to believe that upward and downward pressure are not equally likely. As to the first assumption I disagree . We have pretty good ideas of all causes rates in somewhere like NYC, we have pretty good numbers on things like accidents etc. And then sort of factors you point out like the effect of a recession aren’t on effect yet for the most part. So you have a bunch of excess morbidity, and you have pretty good local statistics in the gaps, at least locally. You are right that this doesn’t go apples to apples in other places but we aren’t doing that so it does matter. There is one kind of interesting wrinkle, you may have stress related impacts that show up even on a short timeline. So there is a question if you can/should attribute those and you can pick reasonable ways, either choice . Flu isn’t likely going to be confounded too badly because people are going to be focussing in the counfounding impacts (e.g. of isolation). It just seems strange to me to assume this will be a problem , some people involved are good at this sort of analysis . Much more likely that a decent job will be done and the estimation errors will have wider bounds. I guess I just don’t see any data to support your pessimism , on that , but I could be wrong of course. I mean this sort of modelling isn’t easy but it is doable.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  > I’m disagreeing that at this moment - and with statistics like excess mortality in NYC, there is very good reason to believe that upward and downward pressure are not equally likely. I would kinda agree, but for different reasons. I’ve seen the inner workings over several government agencies during this crisis, including a few police departments. What has been obvious to me is that there is a very significant difference from place to place in how death and infection statistics are recorded. My observation has been that people who have an obvious political incentive to record lower numbers usually find a way to do it, and vice versa for people who have an obvious political incentive to record higher numbers. I would agree because across the world, there seems to be greater political incentive to have lower numbers. Everything you’re speculating about is plausible, and may turn out to be mostly correct. But there is no reasonable basis for the certainty you claim to have. Especially in regards to claims such as there being no potential for factors other than Covid deaths to have a statistically significant influence on overall mortality rates. That’s just your opinion, and it’s a reasonable on to have, but it’s definitely not “almost certainly” true.

ska 7y ago

I’m not disagreeing with you that their are confounding factors in both directions, this is clearly true. I’m disagreeing that at this moment - and with statistics like excess mortality in NYC, there is very good reason to believe that upward and downward pressure are not equally likely. As to the first assumption I disagree . We have pretty good ideas of all causes rates in somewhere like NYC, we have pretty good numbers on things like accidents etc. And then sort of factors you point out like the effect of a recession aren’t on effect yet for the most part. So you have a bunch of excess morbidity, and you have pretty good local statistics in the gaps, at least locally. You are right that this doesn’t go apples to apples in other places but we aren’t doing that so it does matter. There is one kind of interesting wrinkle, you may have stress related impacts that show up even on a short timeline. So there is a question if you can/should attribute those and you can pick reasonable ways, either choice . Flu isn’t likely going to be confounded too badly because people are going to be focussing in the counfounding impacts (e.g. of isolation). It just seems strange to me to assume this will be a problem , some people involved are good at this sort of analysis . Much more likely that a decent job will be done and the estimation errors will have wider bounds. I guess I just don’t see any data to support your pessimism , on that , but I could be wrong of course. I mean this sort of modelling isn’t easy but it is doable.

AmericanChopper 7y ago
> I’m disagreeing that at this moment - and with statistics like excess mortality in NYC, there is very good reason to believe that upward and downward pressure are not equally likely. I would kinda agree, but for different reasons. I’ve seen the inner workings over several government agencies during this crisis, including a few police departments. What has been obvious to me is that there is a very significant difference from place to place in how death and infection statistics are recorded. My observation has been that people who have an obvious political incentive to record lower numbers usually find a way to do it, and vice versa for people who have an obvious political incentive to record higher numbers. I would agree because across the world, there seems to be greater political incentive to have lower numbers. Everything you’re speculating about is plausible, and may turn out to be mostly correct. But there is no reasonable basis for the certainty you claim to have. Especially in regards to claims such as there being no potential for factors other than Covid deaths to have a statistically significant influence on overall mortality rates. That’s just your opinion, and it’s a reasonable on to have, but it’s definitely not “almost certainly” true.