5 ms·
I suggest the models might be crafted for the purpose of fantastical exaggeration of deaths from COVID. "Because of the pandemic" is of course an even wider ne
by h2odragon 5y ago
I suggest the models might be crafted for the purpose of fantastical exaggeration of deaths from COVID.
"Because of the pandemic" is of course an even wider net. I know of at least 3 shooting deaths reported as COVID fatalities, apparently they tested positive postmortem. "Pandemic deaths" could include what, anyone run over by a COVID positive person? Can we count "future deaths" in today's total? Everybody who had COVID is gonna die... so is everybody who didn't have it.
- blowski 5y agoThis is the challenge of measuring COVID deaths. Did these people die because of COVID? * someone who committed suicide after going bankrupt because of COVID. * someone who died of cancer because they couldn’t get a hospital appointment
- gjsman-1000 5y agoWorse, what if they had COVID asymptomatically when they did it? Is it a COVID death, a suicide, or both? It depends who you ask.
- wolverine876 5y ago> It depends who you ask. That's not really true. Have you seen anywhere that says that about a suicide by someone with COVID who is asymptomatic?
- gjsman-1000 5y agoDead with COVID =/= Dead from COVID. Every study seems to ignore this and includes data from a variety of sources mixing the two.
- whiplash451 5y agoExactly. The indirect toll of covid will never be measured (or told) but is probably shockingly high.
- mdoms 5y agoThe article you're commenting on is literally about one group's attempt to measure and tell the thing you say will never be measured or told.
- whiplash451 5y agoYou're absolutely right. My wording was incorrect. I debated editing my answer but will fix it here: I think that trying to measure this is both incredibly interesting and incredibly useful. Thank you for calling this out!
- wolverine876 5y agoWhat does this study say about it?
- whiplash451 5y agoThis number is in line with the estimate made by The Economist. https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-estimates https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-... (20M global excess deaths, vs 6M official covid deaths). To be clear: we're talking about global excess deaths here (i.e. deaths due to covid in a direct or indirect way), not direct deaths. This analysis struck me in terms of how many people may have died from covid indirectly.
- Mikeb85 5y agoConsidering the pandemic response plunged 100 million people into poverty, many of those excess deaths could be from our response, not the virus.
- jmcgough 5y agoThis is an excess mortality study, not going off of positive covid tests. And there's some meaningful research that suggests that those are relatively accurate because indirect deaths have gone up and down in a way that could be a wash (e.g. less traffic deaths because of shutdown, but more deaths from untreated illness because hospitals were overwhelmed). And this is Academic modeling - they don't have an incentive to inflate the numbers.
- wolverine876 5y ago> I suggest the models might be crafted for the purpose of fantastical exaggeration of deaths from COVID. Based on what? Is there evidence in the study or in what the researchers said? Any evidence? On one hand, we have a research reported in leading scientific journals; on the other, someone's comment on the Internet. > I know of at least 3 shooting deaths reported as COVID fatalities, apparently they tested positive postmortem. Could you cite these for us?
- alphabettsy 5y agoAre there news stories about these deaths? I’ve seen this repeated several times and it seems like something that would be easy to look into.