4 ms·

Without going into the debate about this paper, worth noting that the same assumption is made about covid deaths, ie it covers everyone who was diagnosed or was

by cm2187 5y ago

Without going into the debate about this paper, worth noting that the same assumption is made about covid deaths, ie it covers everyone who was diagnosed or was assumed to had covid before their death, even if the person died of terminal cancer. And since hospitals were a major place to catch the virus, I don’t think we can assume that the misattribution of the cause of death is immaterial.

boomboomsubban 5y ago
That's why you need a control. How many people in an unrelated similar sample also died during the period. Though I have no readily available evidence for this, I suspect that people vaccinated vs unvaccinated would be more similar than people diagnosed with COVID vs people undiagnosed.
- cm2187 5y ago
  Agree, if you segment your data by age (massive age difference between the two populations).
bipson 5y ago
This is a common statement and I don't think this is true. Foremost: If someone had cancer, that does not mean he would have died immediately. Heck, he could have "survived" it, or at least lived for several more years. Second: This does not explain the huge numbers of deaths. You can easily compare how many people died of/with lung cancer from 2019 to 2020 and then for 2020 to 2021 and clearly see that COVID made a difference here (called Übersterblichkeit in German, and visible in all COVID-affected countries). And AFAIK most countries do actually not report a death with COVID, e.g. a car accident, as being caused by COVID. In other words, this is a common myth from the skeptics department and only serves in undermining COVID-related efforts, even if well intended.
- tastroder 5y ago
  There's also enough studies that debunk the myth at this point. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5 for example.
  - cm2187 5y ago
    There might be more serious studies out there, but the abstract in your link says that they selected 26 patients with severe covid and verified that they died of covid. It is a bit circular and certainly not applicable to the countrywide covid stats.
    - tastroder 5y ago
      Okay, clinical pathology in hospital settings aside, what country are you talking about? Here in Germany cause of death determination for COVID-19 deaths is part of the data we gather. Random German state (Bavaria) for example [0]: Cause of death known for 98% of all COVID-19 deaths, 87% of these died from the disease, 13% from other causes. I just don't really see how it's misattribution when that data is available (which I assume it would be in any country not completely overwhelmed by the pandemic). [0] https://www.lgl.bayern.de/gesundheit/infektionsschutz/infektionskrankheiten_a_z/coronavirus/karte_coronavirus/index.htm#tote_geschlecht https://www.lgl.bayern.de/gesundheit/infektionsschutz/infekt...
      - cm2187 5y ago
        Well, in France for instance, this ICU specialist says that 3 patients out of 8 he saw going through the ICU are classified as covid patients because they tested positive but are not in ICU for Covid [1, around 18min into the video]. Now this is one ICU, and not all deaths occur in ICUs, so I wouldn't extrapolate it to national numbers. But it certainly makes me think that covid deaths are over-estimated. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1hOyShXHak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1hOyShXHak
        majewsky 5y ago
- pepperberg 5y ago
  Please have a look at your argumentation: - "I don't think this is true" - "And AFAIK most countries do actually [...]" - "In other words, this is a common myth [...]" You present your thoughts, a theoretical anecdote and things you might have read. And based on that you conclude that it is a "common myth"?
  - bipson 5y ago
    Thank you for your critique. If now you have something to add to the points made after "Foremost:" and "Second:" your post could have added something to the discussion as well, instead of just attacking my form.
    - pepperberg 5y ago
      Again, your argumentation is problematic and therefore hard to argue with. Your first point depicts a fictional anecdote that tries to prove that terminally-ill patients with a positive COVID-19 test could have lived longer. It's like saying "If someone has stage IV cancer and tests positive for COVID-19, that does not mean he died due to COVID-19. Heck, he could have even died due to multidrug-resistant bacteria" What's your source? What's mine? What does it add to the discussion to bring up fictional scenarios? Regarding your second point: Source? How closely does excess mortality correlate with COVID-19? Could there be other causes? We are talking about highly complex situations that need to be thoroughly analyzed.
      - rualca 5y ago
        The "argumentation is hard to argue" because you do not have arguments. If you do not have anything to add about the subject, please don't waste anyone's time complaining about form.
        pepperberg 5y ago
        Did you read my comment?
SiempreViernes 5y ago
No, this is not true in general. There are several different ways to count the number of covid deaths, and "had covid, later died" was simply one that was often used at the start of the pandemic of efficiency reasons. Good investigators have always been aware of the limitations inherent in the assumption, but initially other measures based on the official death certificates were simply not available (and in any case have their own complications when interpreting), so people used what was available and cautioned about the limitations the first four times they said anything.
nradov 5y ago
There weren't enough terminal cancer patients dying with COVID-19 to significantly impact the death numbers. The most common comorbid conditions in COVID-19 deaths were high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and obesity. http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd18.210123 http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd18.210123
f6v 5y ago
It's good that we can compare the deaths in 2020 to previous years [1]. [1] https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13690-020-00496-x https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/...

by cm2187 5y ago

boomboomsubban 5y ago

That's why you need a control. How many people in an unrelated similar sample also died during the period. Though I have no readily available evidence for this, I suspect that people vaccinated vs unvaccinated would be more similar than people diagnosed with COVID vs people undiagnosed.

cm2187 5y ago
Agree, if you segment your data by age (massive age difference between the two populations).

bipson 5y ago

This is a common statement and I don't think this is true. Foremost: If someone had cancer, that does not mean he would have died immediately. Heck, he could have "survived" it, or at least lived for several more years. Second: This does not explain the huge numbers of deaths. You can easily compare how many people died of/with lung cancer from 2019 to 2020 and then for 2020 to 2021 and clearly see that COVID made a difference here (called Übersterblichkeit in German, and visible in all COVID-affected countries). And AFAIK most countries do actually not report a death with COVID, e.g. a car accident, as being caused by COVID. In other words, this is a common myth from the skeptics department and only serves in undermining COVID-related efforts, even if well intended.

tastroder 5y ago
There's also enough studies that debunk the myth at this point. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82862-5 for example.
- cm2187 5y ago
  There might be more serious studies out there, but the abstract in your link says that they selected 26 patients with severe covid and verified that they died of covid. It is a bit circular and certainly not applicable to the countrywide covid stats.
  - tastroder 5y ago
    Okay, clinical pathology in hospital settings aside, what country are you talking about? Here in Germany cause of death determination for COVID-19 deaths is part of the data we gather. Random German state (Bavaria) for example [0]: Cause of death known for 98% of all COVID-19 deaths, 87% of these died from the disease, 13% from other causes. I just don't really see how it's misattribution when that data is available (which I assume it would be in any country not completely overwhelmed by the pandemic). [0] https://www.lgl.bayern.de/gesundheit/infektionsschutz/infektionskrankheiten_a_z/coronavirus/karte_coronavirus/index.htm#tote_geschlecht https://www.lgl.bayern.de/gesundheit/infektionsschutz/infekt...
    - cm2187 5y ago
      Well, in France for instance, this ICU specialist says that 3 patients out of 8 he saw going through the ICU are classified as covid patients because they tested positive but are not in ICU for Covid [1, around 18min into the video]. Now this is one ICU, and not all deaths occur in ICUs, so I wouldn't extrapolate it to national numbers. But it certainly makes me think that covid deaths are over-estimated. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1hOyShXHak https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1hOyShXHak
      - majewsky 5y ago
pepperberg 5y ago
Please have a look at your argumentation: - "I don't think this is true" - "And AFAIK most countries do actually [...]" - "In other words, this is a common myth [...]" You present your thoughts, a theoretical anecdote and things you might have read. And based on that you conclude that it is a "common myth"?
- bipson 5y ago
  Thank you for your critique. If now you have something to add to the points made after "Foremost:" and "Second:" your post could have added something to the discussion as well, instead of just attacking my form.
  - pepperberg 5y ago
    Again, your argumentation is problematic and therefore hard to argue with. Your first point depicts a fictional anecdote that tries to prove that terminally-ill patients with a positive COVID-19 test could have lived longer. It's like saying "If someone has stage IV cancer and tests positive for COVID-19, that does not mean he died due to COVID-19. Heck, he could have even died due to multidrug-resistant bacteria" What's your source? What's mine? What does it add to the discussion to bring up fictional scenarios? Regarding your second point: Source? How closely does excess mortality correlate with COVID-19? Could there be other causes? We are talking about highly complex situations that need to be thoroughly analyzed.
    - rualca 5y ago
      The "argumentation is hard to argue" because you do not have arguments. If you do not have anything to add about the subject, please don't waste anyone's time complaining about form.
      - pepperberg 5y ago
        Did you read my comment?

SiempreViernes 5y ago

No, this is not true in general. There are several different ways to count the number of covid deaths, and "had covid, later died" was simply one that was often used at the start of the pandemic of efficiency reasons. Good investigators have always been aware of the limitations inherent in the assumption, but initially other measures based on the official death certificates were simply not available (and in any case have their own complications when interpreting), so people used what was available and cautioned about the limitations the first four times they said anything.

nradov 5y ago

There weren't enough terminal cancer patients dying with COVID-19 to significantly impact the death numbers. The most common comorbid conditions in COVID-19 deaths were high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and obesity. http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd18.210123 http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd18.210123

f6v 5y ago

It's good that we can compare the deaths in 2020 to previous years [1]. [1] https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13690-020-00496-x https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/...