8 ms·
They mention it, but a big factor driving this is almost certainly obesity. I'd really like to see this done with proper controls for obesity, age demographics,
by darawk 6y ago
They mention it, but a big factor driving this is almost certainly obesity. I'd really like to see this done with proper controls for obesity, age demographics, smoking, etc. I think there'd be interesting stuff to learn from that. It's shocking how difficult it is to do these studies correctly. E.g.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3674138 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3674138
- lliamander 6y agoIt's a big factor in general when looking at any health outcome differences between US and other developed countries. Though I also wonder what early pandemic policies related to nursing homes had on these excess fatalities.
- arethuza 6y agoI found this sobering statement at the end of a BBC article on the difficulties of comparing countries: "But until this outbreak is over it won't be possible to know for sure which countries have dealt with the virus better. 'That's when we can really learn the lessons for next time,' says Prof Oke." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014
- wombatmobile 6y agoAustralia has similar obesity rates to USA, and dramatically lower COVID mortality.
- threatripper 6y agoAustralia counts 0.1% of the population as infected while the US counts 2.4% of the population as infected. Where in the study did they control for that when looking at the mortality (which is counted per population and not per infected)? EDIT: My point is that the epidemic is not over yet and countries with a low immunity could be hit harder later on. It's just too early to compare mortality numbers.
- phreeza 6y agoWhy would you want to do that? At the end of the day, successful pandemic response is a question of how well you prevent deaths overall, not how likely infected people are to die.
- threatripper 6y ago> At the end of the day Yes. Once the epidemic is over. It's not over yet. Having low numbers now could mean that the following outbreaks are more severe. Having lockdowns now could mean that there is no more money for a second, third or fourth lockdown to keep the following outbreaks under control. It could be but it does not have to be. We have to wait until the pandemic is finally under control to really count numbers.
- phreeza 6y agoI agree, but controlling for reported incidence as suggested by OP does not help with this.
- KMag 6y agoWell, if you believe that government interventions are useless in influencing infection rates, then it would make sense to compare case fatality rates instead of total excess mortality. Though, I'm not sure that was the GP's intention.
- phreeza 6y agoNot sure I follow, why would comparing CFRs make more sense? A lot depends on testing in that case.
- KMag 6y agoWell, it replaces one set of variables (those influencing infection rates) with another set of variables (those influencing percentage of infections detected as cases). If you believe that policy has no effect on infection rates, and you believe you can better control for the latter set of variables, then CFRs make a better metric for judging policy effectiveness. I should point out this is all predicated on a statement I believe to be false. (I suspect policy does meaningfully affect infection rates.)
- coldtea 6y agoSimilar obesity rates, similar AS obese people though? E.g if obesity is > 30 BMI, Australia might have similar percentage to the US, but US might still have much mor people > 35 BMI than Australia which could have mostly 30-35 BMI people.
- pjc50 6y agoThere was a paper (which I of course can't find now) that claimed that you also needed to control for the extent to which obese people were given worse treatment or de-prioritised by medical professionals. It's not a blindable variable.