6 ms·

> But even if the actual case fatality rate were 10 times lower – about 5% – it would still be a serious virus to contend with. The case fatality rate for the a

by timr 2y ago

> But even if the actual case fatality rate were 10 times lower – about 5% – it would still be a serious virus to contend with. The case fatality rate for the ancestral strain of Covid-19 was estimated to be around 2.6%, for example. Ugh. The news media never learns [1]: 1) The IFR for Covid-19 was not 2.6%. Less than a tenth of that, actually (yes, even for the ancestral strains). 2) "CFR" is a made up number, because it depends on what cases you count. If you count only a sample of people in the ICU, you can make the CFR look horrible for pretty much any illness. We made this mistake during covid! 3) You can see the same mistake in progress here, because you can't just take this sample of deaths you looked for, divide it by the cases you know about, scale it down by a random factor (that you pulled out of your butt), and then panic about the result [2]. [1] or more likely: never wants to learn, because fear drives clicks. [2] for those who wonder: the right way to do this is random sampling -- you at least have to sample the population randomly to estimate seroprevalence correctly.

perihelions 2y ago
- "for those who wonder: the right way to do this is random sampling -- you at least have to sample the population randomly to estimate seroprevalence correctly" There was a recent experiment that found 7% antibody prevalence in US diary workers, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7344a3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7344a3.htm
sampo 2y ago
> The IFR for Covid-19 was not 2.6%. Less than a tenth of that, actually If we take the number of Covid deaths for, for example New Jersey (the whole state) or New York City from Wikipedia as: 26,795 [1] and 40,000 [2] and divide by the total population (9.5M and 8.8M), we get IFR estimates of 0.28% and 0.51% for NJ and NYC. [1] "As of January 11, 2022, 1.63 million cases were confirmed in the state, incurring 26,795 deaths." [2] "As of August 19, 2023 the city's confirmed COVID-19 deaths exceeded 45,000 and probable deaths exceeded 5,500."
- timr 2y ago
  I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing, but: yeah, don't do what you're doing. There are lots of good publications on this question now. You don't have to make stuff up. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613797/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613797/ > we identified 40 eligible national seroprevalence studies covering 38 countries with pre-vaccination seroprevalence data. For 29 countries (24 high-income, 5 others), publicly available age-stratified COVID-19 death data and age-stratified seroprevalence information were available and were included in the primary analysis. The IFRs had a median of 0.034% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.013–0.056%) for the 0–59 years old population, and 0.095% (IQR 0.036–0.119%) for the 0–69 years old. The median IFR was 0.0003% at 0–19 years, 0.002% at 20–29 years, 0.011% at 30–39 years, 0.035% at 40–49 years, 0.123% at 50–59 years, and 0.506% at 60–69 years. IFR increases approximately 4 times every 10 years. Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025–0.032% for 0–59 years and 0.063–0.082% for 0–69 years. Meta-regression analyses also suggested global IFR of 0.03% and 0.07%, respectively in these age groups.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    how do you square this claim about ancestral strains IFR with the NYC death rate?
    - timr 2y ago
      The NYC death rate is based on a biased sample. If you read the various studies, you will see that there can be significant differences in regional IFR measurements based on legitimate factors (population age, health, etc.) as well as biases (e.g. invalid statistics). NYC probably has a mix of both -- older/sicker people, as well as just fundamentally bad statistics. Particularly on the question of "how many people have the virus?" NYC was laughably, objectively bad at measuring anything of relevance. They made sure that they counted everyone who died, though!
      - sampo 2y ago
        > The NYC death rate is based on a biased sample. It is not based on a sample. It is all reported Covid deaths divided by the population of NYC. Full set, not a subset.
maxerickson 2y ago
The death rate of people that are noticeably sick is interesting actually, especially if lots of people are getting noticeably sick. Like probably not interesting enough to start shooting people you think might be sick (panic), but maybe interesting enough to encourage voluntary social distancing measures (a measured response).
- timr 2y ago
  > Like probably not interesting enough to start shooting people you think might be sick (panic), but maybe interesting enough to encourage voluntary social distancing measures (a measured response). ...a "measured response" that caused huge harm, did generational damage to children, and shouldn't be used casually. Certainly not without proof that it works for some important, clear goal [1]. [1] for reference: "because we're scared and we think it might help" is not a clear goal.
  - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
    If you think social distancing and masking caused more generational harm to kids than Covid deaths of friends and relatives you're going to have a very interesting time trying to survive the next pandemic.
    - timr 2y ago
      Nobody said anything about "masking". But yes, "social distancing" is what closed down a lot of schools around the US, and kept them closed for years. NYC, for example, kept kids out of school based on "social distancing" for a year and a half [1], not counting the years of follow-on silliness that some schools still do to this day. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/world/reopening-timeline-nyc-schools.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/world/reopening-timeline-...
  - singleshot_ 2y ago
    Staying away from me when you’re sick actually works pretty well, as everyone knows.
ashildr 2y ago
So your point is that even with a IFR of less than 2.6% bodies had to be stored in freeze trucks? Ugh.

by timr 2y ago

perihelions 2y ago

- "for those who wonder: the right way to do this is random sampling -- you at least have to sample the population randomly to estimate seroprevalence correctly" There was a recent experiment that found 7% antibody prevalence in US diary workers, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7344a3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/wr/mm7344a3.htm

sampo 2y ago

> The IFR for Covid-19 was not 2.6%. Less than a tenth of that, actually If we take the number of Covid deaths for, for example New Jersey (the whole state) or New York City from Wikipedia as: 26,795 [1] and 40,000 [2] and divide by the total population (9.5M and 8.8M), we get IFR estimates of 0.28% and 0.51% for NJ and NYC. [1] "As of January 11, 2022, 1.63 million cases were confirmed in the state, incurring 26,795 deaths." [2] "As of August 19, 2023 the city's confirmed COVID-19 deaths exceeded 45,000 and probable deaths exceeded 5,500."

timr 2y ago
I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing, but: yeah, don't do what you're doing. There are lots of good publications on this question now. You don't have to make stuff up. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613797/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613797/ > we identified 40 eligible national seroprevalence studies covering 38 countries with pre-vaccination seroprevalence data. For 29 countries (24 high-income, 5 others), publicly available age-stratified COVID-19 death data and age-stratified seroprevalence information were available and were included in the primary analysis. The IFRs had a median of 0.034% (interquartile range (IQR) 0.013–0.056%) for the 0–59 years old population, and 0.095% (IQR 0.036–0.119%) for the 0–69 years old. The median IFR was 0.0003% at 0–19 years, 0.002% at 20–29 years, 0.011% at 30–39 years, 0.035% at 40–49 years, 0.123% at 50–59 years, and 0.506% at 60–69 years. IFR increases approximately 4 times every 10 years. Including data from another 9 countries with imputed age distribution of COVID-19 deaths yielded median IFR of 0.025–0.032% for 0–59 years and 0.063–0.082% for 0–69 years. Meta-regression analyses also suggested global IFR of 0.03% and 0.07%, respectively in these age groups.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  how do you square this claim about ancestral strains IFR with the NYC death rate?
  - timr 2y ago
    The NYC death rate is based on a biased sample. If you read the various studies, you will see that there can be significant differences in regional IFR measurements based on legitimate factors (population age, health, etc.) as well as biases (e.g. invalid statistics). NYC probably has a mix of both -- older/sicker people, as well as just fundamentally bad statistics. Particularly on the question of "how many people have the virus?" NYC was laughably, objectively bad at measuring anything of relevance. They made sure that they counted everyone who died, though!
    - sampo 2y ago
      > The NYC death rate is based on a biased sample. It is not based on a sample. It is all reported Covid deaths divided by the population of NYC. Full set, not a subset.

maxerickson 2y ago

The death rate of people that are noticeably sick is interesting actually, especially if lots of people are getting noticeably sick. Like probably not interesting enough to start shooting people you think might be sick (panic), but maybe interesting enough to encourage voluntary social distancing measures (a measured response).

timr 2y ago
> Like probably not interesting enough to start shooting people you think might be sick (panic), but maybe interesting enough to encourage voluntary social distancing measures (a measured response). ...a "measured response" that caused huge harm, did generational damage to children, and shouldn't be used casually. Certainly not without proof that it works for some important, clear goal [1]. [1] for reference: "because we're scared and we think it might help" is not a clear goal.
- TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
  If you think social distancing and masking caused more generational harm to kids than Covid deaths of friends and relatives you're going to have a very interesting time trying to survive the next pandemic.
  - timr 2y ago
    Nobody said anything about "masking". But yes, "social distancing" is what closed down a lot of schools around the US, and kept them closed for years. NYC, for example, kept kids out of school based on "social distancing" for a year and a half [1], not counting the years of follow-on silliness that some schools still do to this day. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/world/reopening-timeline-nyc-schools.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/13/world/reopening-timeline-...
- singleshot_ 2y ago
  Staying away from me when you’re sick actually works pretty well, as everyone knows.

ashildr 2y ago

So your point is that even with a IFR of less than 2.6% bodies had to be stored in freeze trucks? Ugh.