4 ms·

> Chances to get heart injury from Covid infection 1:100 Not true. At this point over a billion people on Earth had Covid. (And that's a low estimate.) There

> Chances to get heart injury from Covid infection 1:100 Not true. At this point over a billion people on Earth had Covid. (And that's a low estimate.) There aren't 10 million people with new heart injuries in 2020.

gbil 5y ago
Where do you get this from ? Confirmed cases are in the 200m range, so you assume that the actual number is 5+ times more somehow?
- bbarnett 5y ago
  Many people are asymptomatic. A 5x number is likely low. The only way to really know, would have been have worldwide, forced testing of every single person, weekly. EG billions of test per week. There were no tests at the start, not enough worldwide testing ability for the first 6 months, and once capacity existed, generally only people who felt sick were tested. And that's in rich nations.
  - noduerme 5y ago
    That's completely false. And don't "rich nations" this, as if your political view makes a point. We know that the asymptomatic rate for covid-19 is about 20% for adults, 40-50% for children, because we actually did massive testing of exposed people. Millions of tests were performed in the US, enough to get the positivity rate in most states down to 3-4%. There were not masses of 5x the positivity rate escaping these tests. And if you think everyone had it before the testing started, you're wrong, because the hospital records would have shown it.
    - textgel 5y ago
      You can't comprehend that richer nations would have better testing and would therefore have a better idea of how many cases they have... And you think hospitals would have records of patients testing positive for a disease we had no knowledge of let alone means of testing before either of those came into place...
      - noduerme 5y ago
        I quite well comprehend that richer nations have better testing. Those are the test results we have to go on (not Cameroon or North Korea - those would be blank guesses). The numbers are static across all nations that did serious population testing, so we actually do know the asymptomatic rates, and they are not 5x the diagnosed rates. They may well be 5x the positivity rate in poor countries that don't do much testing, but that still doesn't change the asymptomatic rate for people who have the virus. Second point: Hospitals were recording symptoms of covid even prior to widely available testing, and as soon as the virus spiked their ICU beds were full. This has been the case in every country in the world. They didn't need to test patients. Those patients were dying in the hallway, and on ventilators. The spike was clear and obvious in each country when it arrived. And in each country, the percentage of people testing positive who had no symptoms was roughly the same. So the argument that there have been 5x as many people as reported who had covid - and had no symptoms - is totally false.
        textgel 5y ago
        Sounds plausible but are there any sources on these mass testing efforts and their methods?
        noduerme 5y ago
        https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
        makomk 5y ago
        Actual infections 5x the number of cases detected through testing in rich, developed countries with relatively widespread tests seems pretty plausible, I think there's some evidence the UK was close to that despite testing pretty heavily compared to the rest of the world e.g. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210215/Only-2525-of-SARS-CoV-2-infections-are-detected-in-the-UK-Study.aspx https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210215/Only-2525-of-SARS... (I seem to recall the BBC reported on this at the time, but finding their old Covid-19 coverage again is basically impossible.) Remember, fully asymptomatic infections aren't the only problem, there are also infections that technically have symptoms but they're too vague, commonplace and non-specific to lead to people getting tested.
    - ekianjo 5y ago
      We dont know at all actually because the virus has variants with different R profiles and symptoms too.
    - redis_mlc 5y ago
      > That's completely false. Umm, NIH's June 2021 report number is 5x were asymptomatic based on studies of blood donations and hospital samples. Amazing how vitriolic HN readers are about a topic they know nothing about.
    - hamilyon2 5y ago
      A half of people I know, who self-reported covid-like symptoms from mild to very severe (n=20) had their tests negative. This is Moscow, Russia. They are not counted in official statistics.
  - eitland 5y ago
    Norway lacked test capacity like everyone else early during the pandemic. We did antibody tests later to see what we had missed. Turns out in spite of all asymptomatic cases etc the guesstimates were fairly good. Now Norway is an extremely rich country and healthcare is (generally) excellent here, but if asymptomatic cases were really widespread we should have seen some non trivial percentage showing up in the antibody tests that we weren't aware of earlier.
    - ekianjo 5y ago
      Norway has low population density so you cannot really extrapolate to countries where people live in much denser areas with more chance of exposure.
      - qwetueu654 5y ago
        Doesn't work like that. The main way respitory diseases spread is via socializing (ie talking face-to-face indoors). No matter the population density, rural or urban, people socialize at roughly the same rate nowadays.
        ekianjo 5y ago
        Of course it matters. If you have millions of people taking public transport every day vs people driving in individual cars, makes a huge difference in exposure.
- ekianjo 5y ago
  confirmed cases is already a filter of those who were tested in the first place. I case you dont know, in many places it is still very hard to get a test until you have severe symptoms.
robbiep 5y ago
Myocarditis is usually transient particularly post infection. These figures are roughly accurate especially considering that the symptoms are quite often mild as they also were via vaccination. There’s no real surprise here: aetiology of the myocarditis during covid is basically identical to that via vaccine, so the good news is that it’s at a lower rate, it just stands out more because the general symptoms of vaccination are so much lower
rndgermandude 5y ago
>There aren't 10 million people with new heart injuries in 2020. Are you sure about that, and how do you figure? Covid-19 related deaths alone are 4M and that's only tracked deaths. We don't yet know the fallout and long term effects from non-fatal Covid-19. Research on temporary and permanent damage including "Long Covid" has only begun. But with the data available right now, I have no problem imagining 10M Covid-19 related heart injuries globally. E.g. there are studies, right now small scale (N=100), that suggest 4/5th of patients had "cardiac involvement" and 3/5th had "ongoing myocardial inflammation" after recovery from Covid-19 [1] (this doesn't yet mean permanent heart damage, nor is the small sample conclusive, but I think it's an indicator that we should pay careful attention to this area). [1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/...

gbil 5y ago

Where do you get this from ? Confirmed cases are in the 200m range, so you assume that the actual number is 5+ times more somehow?

bbarnett 5y ago
Many people are asymptomatic. A 5x number is likely low. The only way to really know, would have been have worldwide, forced testing of every single person, weekly. EG billions of test per week. There were no tests at the start, not enough worldwide testing ability for the first 6 months, and once capacity existed, generally only people who felt sick were tested. And that's in rich nations.
- noduerme 5y ago
  That's completely false. And don't "rich nations" this, as if your political view makes a point. We know that the asymptomatic rate for covid-19 is about 20% for adults, 40-50% for children, because we actually did massive testing of exposed people. Millions of tests were performed in the US, enough to get the positivity rate in most states down to 3-4%. There were not masses of 5x the positivity rate escaping these tests. And if you think everyone had it before the testing started, you're wrong, because the hospital records would have shown it.
  - textgel 5y ago
    You can't comprehend that richer nations would have better testing and would therefore have a better idea of how many cases they have... And you think hospitals would have records of patients testing positive for a disease we had no knowledge of let alone means of testing before either of those came into place...
    - noduerme 5y ago
      I quite well comprehend that richer nations have better testing. Those are the test results we have to go on (not Cameroon or North Korea - those would be blank guesses). The numbers are static across all nations that did serious population testing, so we actually do know the asymptomatic rates, and they are not 5x the diagnosed rates. They may well be 5x the positivity rate in poor countries that don't do much testing, but that still doesn't change the asymptomatic rate for people who have the virus. Second point: Hospitals were recording symptoms of covid even prior to widely available testing, and as soon as the virus spiked their ICU beds were full. This has been the case in every country in the world. They didn't need to test patients. Those patients were dying in the hallway, and on ventilators. The spike was clear and obvious in each country when it arrived. And in each country, the percentage of people testing positive who had no symptoms was roughly the same. So the argument that there have been 5x as many people as reported who had covid - and had no symptoms - is totally false.
      - textgel 5y ago
        Sounds plausible but are there any sources on these mass testing efforts and their methods?
        noduerme 5y ago
        https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
      - makomk 5y ago
        Actual infections 5x the number of cases detected through testing in rich, developed countries with relatively widespread tests seems pretty plausible, I think there's some evidence the UK was close to that despite testing pretty heavily compared to the rest of the world e.g. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210215/Only-2525-of-SARS-CoV-2-infections-are-detected-in-the-UK-Study.aspx https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210215/Only-2525-of-SARS... (I seem to recall the BBC reported on this at the time, but finding their old Covid-19 coverage again is basically impossible.) Remember, fully asymptomatic infections aren't the only problem, there are also infections that technically have symptoms but they're too vague, commonplace and non-specific to lead to people getting tested.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    We dont know at all actually because the virus has variants with different R profiles and symptoms too.
  - redis_mlc 5y ago
    > That's completely false. Umm, NIH's June 2021 report number is 5x were asymptomatic based on studies of blood donations and hospital samples. Amazing how vitriolic HN readers are about a topic they know nothing about.
  - hamilyon2 5y ago
    A half of people I know, who self-reported covid-like symptoms from mild to very severe (n=20) had their tests negative. This is Moscow, Russia. They are not counted in official statistics.
- eitland 5y ago
  Norway lacked test capacity like everyone else early during the pandemic. We did antibody tests later to see what we had missed. Turns out in spite of all asymptomatic cases etc the guesstimates were fairly good. Now Norway is an extremely rich country and healthcare is (generally) excellent here, but if asymptomatic cases were really widespread we should have seen some non trivial percentage showing up in the antibody tests that we weren't aware of earlier.
  - ekianjo 5y ago
    Norway has low population density so you cannot really extrapolate to countries where people live in much denser areas with more chance of exposure.
    - qwetueu654 5y ago
      Doesn't work like that. The main way respitory diseases spread is via socializing (ie talking face-to-face indoors). No matter the population density, rural or urban, people socialize at roughly the same rate nowadays.
      - ekianjo 5y ago
        Of course it matters. If you have millions of people taking public transport every day vs people driving in individual cars, makes a huge difference in exposure.
ekianjo 5y ago
confirmed cases is already a filter of those who were tested in the first place. I case you dont know, in many places it is still very hard to get a test until you have severe symptoms.

robbiep 5y ago

Myocarditis is usually transient particularly post infection. These figures are roughly accurate especially considering that the symptoms are quite often mild as they also were via vaccination. There’s no real surprise here: aetiology of the myocarditis during covid is basically identical to that via vaccine, so the good news is that it’s at a lower rate, it just stands out more because the general symptoms of vaccination are so much lower

rndgermandude 5y ago

>There aren't 10 million people with new heart injuries in 2020. Are you sure about that, and how do you figure? Covid-19 related deaths alone are 4M and that's only tracked deaths. We don't yet know the fallout and long term effects from non-fatal Covid-19. Research on temporary and permanent damage including "Long Covid" has only begun. But with the data available right now, I have no problem imagining 10M Covid-19 related heart injuries globally. E.g. there are studies, right now small scale (N=100), that suggest 4/5th of patients had "cardiac involvement" and 3/5th had "ongoing myocardial inflammation" after recovery from Covid-19 [1] (this doesn't yet mean permanent heart damage, nor is the small sample conclusive, but I think it's an indicator that we should pay careful attention to this area). [1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/...