3 ms·

But on an apples to apples comparison, aren’t there very few flu deaths confirmed by testing? And what you cite can’t be proof that the flu is more deadly than

by graeme 6y ago

But on an apples to apples comparison, aren’t there very few flu deaths confirmed by testing? And what you cite can’t be proof that the flu is more deadly than people think. If what you say is true, those deaths are in the numbers used for the death rate of the flu. The point of that article is that perhaps our algorithms for estimating flu deaths are wrong. Edit: Can someone explain the downvotes? Any error in my reasoning is not obvious to me. The claim above was that: 1. Heart attacks are included in flu death estimations 2. This should make the public think the flu is more deadly than they believe That seems contradictory, as the public’s belief about the deadliness of the flu comes in stats from point #1. As for the article, the author made no real attempt to rebut its central claim.

bradstewart 6y ago
> aren’t there very few flu deaths confirmed by testing? Is this true? An anecdote, but both times I and/or my partner had fever and flu-like symptoms, a flu test was the first thing performed by the doctor.
- graeme 6y ago
  Yup! Only about 20% of flu deaths are confirmed by test. The rest are estimated by an algorithm (which the OP alluded to) Sorry for AMP link, canonical url is paywalled: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/%3foutputType=amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/business... The CDC explains its methodology here. There are valid reasons to assume influenza deaths are higher than confirmed tested deaths. But many of these apply to coronavirus as well: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/how-cdc-estimates.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/how-cdc-estimates.htm