5 ms·

> new cases per capita Why is this a relevant metric at all?? UK (where I am) has more confirmed cases than in March, yet comparatively negligible death rate.

by tomp 6y ago

> new cases per capita Why is this a relevant metric at all?? UK (where I am) has more confirmed cases than in March, yet comparatively negligible death rate. So the raw new cases metric is obviously completely useless and uninformative, there's clearly something else going on (better management of disease, more medical resources, less extremely vulnerable people, more testing, ...)

HarryHirsch 6y ago
Why is this a relevant metric at all? We don't know enough about long-term problems affecting those who caught it, although one glance at Boris Johnson should get anyone worried. Convalescence is protracted, and there are reports of lung damage and cardiomyopathies in a good number of recovered patients. We don't know yet for certain about neurological problems, but there are indications that covid might cause demyelinating disease, and until that's settled I'm not going to find out.
- UncleOxidant 6y ago
  > one glance at Boris Johnson should get anyone worried. He always looked disheveled. Has it gotten worse? Agreed on he longterm effects, I don't think we know all of the longterm impacts yet and as such I'd prefer to avoid it until a safe vaccine is available.
  - pvaldes 6y ago
    Tired look, red eyes and zombie walking is not a uncommon effect after a new baby arrives at home.
    - HarryHirsch 6y ago
      His kind has nannies.
rossdavidh 6y ago
If you're looking at human cost, then yes, deaths is what matter. If you're evaluating protocols to prevent infection, then cases per capita is exactly what you care about. The likelihood of death when you get infected could be a better measure of how well the hospital can treat it, for example. But if you're evaluating how well mask-wearing impacts the spread of the virus, then looking at new cases per capita is the metric of interest.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > If you're looking at human cost, then yes, deaths is what matter. If you're evaluating protocols to prevent infection, then cases per capita is exactly what you care about. But there is no reason to care whether infection is prevented or not, unless infection carries some sort of cost. That metric has no value on its own.
  - chipotle_coyote 6y ago
    I'm genuinely confused at what you're trying to get at here. I mean, in the abstract, sure, if an infection had no "cost" we wouldn't care about how widespread it was. But it's fairly well-established by now that this specific infection carries not only a small but obviously real risk of death, but a risk of lingering, debilitating effects that go far beyond the respiratory system.
- toupeira 6y ago
  Cases per capita is still very misleading without accounting for number of tests though, no? Looking at some countries that offer more detailed data, you can sometimes see the cases double, while hospitalizations and deaths grow at a much lower rate (if at all). Compare for example the UK: - This chart for the daily new cases shows a dramatic second wave that even exceeds the first one: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ - This chart for the positive rate on the other hand shows a modest increase to ~3% over the past few weeks, far below the 30% in April: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#the-positive-rate-a-crucial-metric-for-understanding-the-pandemic https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#the-positive-... - And if you look at the number of tests you'll see it has more than tripled since April, hence the increase in "cases": https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#how-many-tests-are-performed-each-day https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#how-many-test...
UncleOxidant 6y ago
> yet comparatively negligible death rate. Isn't this primarily because it's mostly the younger demographic that was getting covid over the summer?
jokethrowaway 6y ago
Steroid usage is now part of the guidelines, it wasn't in March. Non invasive CPAP are preferred to ventilators (which have a terrible survival rate).

by tomp 6y ago

HarryHirsch 6y ago

Why is this a relevant metric at all? We don't know enough about long-term problems affecting those who caught it, although one glance at Boris Johnson should get anyone worried. Convalescence is protracted, and there are reports of lung damage and cardiomyopathies in a good number of recovered patients. We don't know yet for certain about neurological problems, but there are indications that covid might cause demyelinating disease, and until that's settled I'm not going to find out.

UncleOxidant 6y ago
> one glance at Boris Johnson should get anyone worried. He always looked disheveled. Has it gotten worse? Agreed on he longterm effects, I don't think we know all of the longterm impacts yet and as such I'd prefer to avoid it until a safe vaccine is available.
- pvaldes 6y ago
  Tired look, red eyes and zombie walking is not a uncommon effect after a new baby arrives at home.
  - HarryHirsch 6y ago
    His kind has nannies.

rossdavidh 6y ago

If you're looking at human cost, then yes, deaths is what matter. If you're evaluating protocols to prevent infection, then cases per capita is exactly what you care about. The likelihood of death when you get infected could be a better measure of how well the hospital can treat it, for example. But if you're evaluating how well mask-wearing impacts the spread of the virus, then looking at new cases per capita is the metric of interest.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> If you're looking at human cost, then yes, deaths is what matter. If you're evaluating protocols to prevent infection, then cases per capita is exactly what you care about. But there is no reason to care whether infection is prevented or not, unless infection carries some sort of cost. That metric has no value on its own.
- chipotle_coyote 6y ago
  I'm genuinely confused at what you're trying to get at here. I mean, in the abstract, sure, if an infection had no "cost" we wouldn't care about how widespread it was. But it's fairly well-established by now that this specific infection carries not only a small but obviously real risk of death, but a risk of lingering, debilitating effects that go far beyond the respiratory system.
toupeira 6y ago
Cases per capita is still very misleading without accounting for number of tests though, no? Looking at some countries that offer more detailed data, you can sometimes see the cases double, while hospitalizations and deaths grow at a much lower rate (if at all). Compare for example the UK: - This chart for the daily new cases shows a dramatic second wave that even exceeds the first one: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/ - This chart for the positive rate on the other hand shows a modest increase to ~3% over the past few weeks, far below the 30% in April: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#the-positive-rate-a-crucial-metric-for-understanding-the-pandemic https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#the-positive-... - And if you look at the number of tests you'll see it has more than tripled since April, hence the increase in "cases": https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#how-many-tests-are-performed-each-day https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing#how-many-test...

UncleOxidant 6y ago

> yet comparatively negligible death rate. Isn't this primarily because it's mostly the younger demographic that was getting covid over the summer?

jokethrowaway 6y ago

Steroid usage is now part of the guidelines, it wasn't in March. Non invasive CPAP are preferred to ventilators (which have a terrible survival rate).