2 ms·
Not death-counts, but definitely data about the deaths yes. So detailed reasons for the death, specifics about the death that may be pertinent, their covid hist
by zo1 5y ago
Not death-counts, but definitely data about the deaths yes. So detailed reasons for the death, specifics about the death that may be pertinent, their covid history prior to the death, how covid did or didn't affect their behavior that may have caused the death, etc.
Example: Are we keeping track of all the people that skipped a routine test because of covid lockdowns? And then, is there a subsequent record of that fact linked to every covid case of death? Or are we stuck modelling the correlation/overlap of those two data points because we track those statistics across populations separately?
- saalweachter 5y agoEh, I think we have enough variation in local responses that we'll be able to tease a lot of the data out with a reasonable degree of confidence. We're living in a world full of counterfactuals, with some places mandating -- and enforcing -- mandates on various public health measures rigorously, and other places not. The pandemic also has a time dimension. To the extent that excess deaths are from deferred treatment and missed testing, we expect them to get worse over time -- people missing a cancer screening in March 2020 shouldn't have resulted in excess deaths in April 2020, in the extreme. "Real" COVID deaths meanwhile we'd expect to follow the peaks and valleys of the infections. It will be a lot of work, but that's what grad students are for.
- Ensorceled 5y ago> It will be a lot of work, but that's what grad students are for. I really get the impression that a lot of these conspiracy theories are really rooted in an inability to understand how statistics work; and just how much can be legitimately derived from the data.