6 ms·
If you look at the parameters for the "valuation" of a SARS-CoV-2 infection, they are hard to take seriously. They are based on a mapping of typical workplace i
by neilmock 6y ago
If you look at the parameters for the "valuation" of a SARS-CoV-2 infection, they are hard to take seriously. They are based on a mapping of typical workplace injuries to viral infections. This is the paper referenced: http://ftp.iza.org/dp13632.pdf http://ftp.iza.org/dp13632.pdf.
A purely asymptomatic infection is valued at $11,000
A symptomatic but non-hospitalized infection is valued at $33,000
If you are in the hospital for any reason with an infection, $512,000
If you are in the ICU for any reason with an infection, $1,100,000
If you are in the ICU on a ventilator, $2,900,000
- tellmelies 6y agoAre you from America? Those numbers look pretty reasonable for US healthcare bills.
- neilmock 6y agoI didn't realize I would get a bill when not seeking medical intervention at all, especially for $11,000 or $33,000.
- klyrs 6y agoSeveral studies have shown that asymptomatic infections may have long-term impact. The valuation may be taking that into account -- you might not get that bill today, but maybe you (or your insurance) will pay that over the course of your lifetime
- liability 6y ago> Several studies have shown that asymptomatic infections may have long-term impact. To the tune of tens of thousands of dollars on average? That's not plausible.
- jbeam 6y agoSure it is. If 5% of asymptomatic cases require care that costs $200k, you come to $10k a person. This is entirely plausible in the US, particularly if you are amortizing the cost over the lifetime of the patient.
- liability 6y agoCan you cite any paper that suggests serious complications for asymptomatic patients is anywhere even remotely close to 5%? All I've seen is a handful of rare anecdotes, nothing to suggest it's a remotely likely outcome.
- klyrs 6y agoYou're looking at actuarial estimates. Overestimating unknown-unknowns is more pragmatic than underestimating them. No, the article doesn't show how that particular sausage is made; we're all out here guessing.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nick_kline 6y agoAs others have said, there are unknown but already detected cases of asymptomatic impacts. One football team doc said he thought 1/8 had some impact on heart function long term. Those who see this as no big deal for some reason are stuck on arguing the exact percentage of impact.
- valenciarose 6y agoThis isn’t an attempt to estimate a typical bill for an asymptomatic individual. It’s an attempt to set an expected value for the costs that will eventually be incurred across the population of asymptomatic patients. They are using a mean to describe how costs will scale with the size of that population (asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 positive) and NOT as a way to describe the typical costs of individuals in that population. The cost distribution is almost certainly a power law. I’d guess the median is zero and the mean is many thousand dollars.
- chishaku 6y ago> they are hard to take seriously. Why? What convention would you use? If you think these are estimates of related healthcare costs, you should probably re-read the paper.
- neilmock 6y agoI would not value the public health cost dollar estimate of an asymptomatic infection at 11k. I would not value the public cost dollar estimate of a non-hospitalized infection at 33k.
- chishaku 6y agoWhy? The authors thoroughly outline their approach (and its limitations) based on available literature. What specific criticism do you have?
- neilmock 6y agoIf you read the literature, they compare a symptomatic viral infection to having your hand or foot broken, or a pelvic fracture, or a mild to severe head trauma. I do not see any evidence of those things being equivalent.
- chishaku 6y agoThe paper doesn't make those things equivalent. Best case, your comment is an oversimplification of what the authors spent a dozen or so pages explaining. The limitations they describe perhaps encompass some of your concern. They also describe alternative calculations.
- kube-system 6y agoFor the person who suffers them, they are not equivalent. But that isn't what is being measured. When measuring economic impact, they could very well be equivalent. A dollar lost when someone can't work due to a broken bone is economically equivalent to a dollar lost when someone bedridden with a virus.
- kube-system 6y agoWhy not? The US GDP dropped by over 2 trillion in just the second quarter. That's over $300,000 per infection right there. And that's if we don't count future quarters, Q1 2020, or any of the trillions in stimulus that has been pumped into the economy. It doesn't seem these numbers are out of line with the back-of-the-envelope math.
- votepaunchy 6y agoYou’re off by a factor of 4. US GDP is a little over $20T/year, and dropped a little under 10% 2020q2, so a drop of about $500B.
- kube-system 6y agoAh, I was looking at an annualized dollar amount. Still, it would be a reasonable back-of-the-envelope number considering that the economic impact is still present and is going to continue into the future at least a year.