Are we not taking Covid-19 seriously

[Monocacy]

Originally Posted by jakebake91

So my logic was to use #of deaths and # of positives to get a fatality rate of I think it was 4% at that time. Is that right? Idk. Seems right.

Originally Posted by Jay Dub

249,670 Deaths / 11,465,722 Cases = .0217 = 2.17%

Y'all are calculating the case fatality ratio (CFR). Keep in mind that there are two different "fatality ratios":

Case fatality ratio (CFR) is the proportion of individuals diagnosed with a disease ("cases") who die from that disease. The number of cases depends on the amount of testing done. Consequently, the CFR varies over time and in different locations, depending on how many cases are identified via testing. More testing explains why the CFR has dropped recently compared with early in the pandemic, when very few people were tested.

Case fatality ratio (CFR) = (# of COVID-19 deaths) / (# of COVID-19 cases)

Infection Fatality Ratio (IFR) provides a better measure of the true severity of a disease. Serological testing of a representative random sample of the population is needed to estimate the true number of infected individuals

Infection fatality ratio (IFR) = (# of COVID-19 deaths) / (# of COVID-19 infections)

Estimating Mortality from COVID-19 | WHO

As an example, an article in Stat calculated the infection fatality rate (IFR) in Arizona as follows:

To determine the infection fatality rate in Arizona, we divided the percentage of the state’s population who had died from Covid-19 as of July 30, 2020, by the 12.9% of the population that was infected based on antibody testing between July 20 and July 26, 2020. Antibody testing captures the total percentage of the population that had been infected with Covid-19 from the beginning of the outbreak. We then calculated and applied a standard correction factor for the delay between case diagnosis and death. This yielded an infection fatality rate of 0.63%, which is not significantly different from the CDC’s best estimate of 0.65% for the U.S. in the Spring of 2020.

Is Covid-19 growing less lethal? The infection fatality rate says ‘no’ | Stat

The other significant factor with COVID-19 is that fatality ratios are age-dependent. The CDC's COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios use the following estimates for IFR by age range:

0-19 years: 0.00003 (0.003%)
20-49 years: 0.0002 (0.02%)
50-69 years: 0.005 (0.5%)
70+ years: 0.054 (5.4%)

This why IFR may be lower in developing countries with younger populations, whereas IFR may be higher in developed countries despite greater health care resources.

Also, death is not the only bad outcome from COVID-19. We are just getting a feel for how many survivors may have long-term adverse health effects.

Hope that helps.

[jakebake91]

Originally Posted by Monocacy

Y'all are calculating the case fatality ratio (CFR). Keep in mind that there are two different "fatality ratios":

Case fatality ratio (CFR) is the proportion of individuals diagnosed with a disease ("cases") who die from that disease. The number of cases depends on the amount of testing done. Consequently, the CFR varies over time and in different locations, depending on how many cases are identified via testing. More testing explains why the CFR has dropped recently compared with early in the pandemic, when very few people were tested.

Case fatality ratio (CFR) = (# of COVID-19 deaths) / (# of COVID-19 cases)

Infection Fatality Ratio (IFR) provides a better measure of the true severity of a disease. Serological testing of a representative random sample of the population is needed to estimate the true number of infected individuals

Infection fatality ratio (IFR) = (# of COVID-19 deaths) / (# of COVID-19 infections)

Estimating Mortality from COVID-19 | WHO

As an example, an article in Stat calculated the infection fatality rate (IFR) in Arizona as follows:

To determine the infection fatality rate in Arizona, we divided the percentage of the state’s population who had died from Covid-19 as of July 30, 2020, by the 12.9% of the population that was infected based on antibody testing between July 20 and July 26, 2020. Antibody testing captures the total percentage of the population that had been infected with Covid-19 from the beginning of the outbreak. We then calculated and applied a standard correction factor for the delay between case diagnosis and death. This yielded an infection fatality rate of 0.63%, which is not significantly different from the CDC’s best estimate of 0.65% for the U.S. in the Spring of 2020.

Is Covid-19 growing less lethal? The infection fatality rate says ‘no’ | Stat

The other significant factor with COVID-19 is that fatality ratios are age-dependent. The CDC's COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios use the following estimates for IFR by age range:

0-19 years: 0.00003 (0.003%)
20-49 years: 0.0002 (0.02%)
50-69 years: 0.005 (0.5%)
70+ years: 0.054 (5.4%)

This why IFR may be lower in developing countries with younger populations, whereas IFR may be higher in developed countries despite greater health care resources.

Also, death is not the only bad outcome from COVID-19. We are just getting a feel for how many survivors may have long-term adverse health effects.

Hope that helps.

Incredibly fantastic information! Thank you kindly!!

I wasn't positive I was right in what I was figuring. However, I felt confident that the numbers I was seeing involving the states population were basically useless. I know it gives a percentage of something, but not one we should be using to make decisions.

[DavidSauls]

It seems to me that the rate of deaths, as a percentage of population, is useful for making decisions, too. It combines the infection rate and the mortality rate to say how likely members of the population are to die, and says a lot about how bad the situation is. (With apologies for any incorrect terminology).

With the weaknesses that it mixes in wildly different demographics, so it doesn't accurately describe any one person's risk. And that it produces glossy numbers like 99.9% of a population not dying, which sounds good until you think about what that number actually means.

[dysmike]

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

And that it produces glossy numbers like 99.9% of a population not dying, which sounds good until you think about what that number actually means.

Yep. I guess all those people were useless.

[Dingus]

What if we didn't even think about deaths? I don't want to get Influenza, even though I know I won't die from it. Getting the flu is terrible! If we fail to address COVID and just get it and deal with it, there is a chance that it becomes another Influenza, with enough infections globally to cause the diverse mutations that allow Influenza to be a new pandemic each year. Just imagine five COVID variants floating around, ON TOP of the already existing Influenza and common cold. How many viruses do we want to be dealing with as a species? How about we just take some common sense precautions to limit the infection rate and therefore limit the mutation rate and hopefully stop this long term? Oh and while we are knocking out COVID, we are also significantly curtailing Influenza! If we can drop Influenza infections globally in a single year it will have the effect of lessening the successive Influenza outbreaks for a couple more years to come.

[dysmike]

People die from influenza all the time, so while it's unlikely.. I can't say I KNOW I'm not gonna die from it. I don't really care much, I HATE being sick. Why on earth would I even want to do that to myself?

It's why I get an influenza vaccine every year. Why I take more care when colds and the flu are circulating (wash my hands, don't go out if I'm not feeling well, etc). I thoroughly dug the fact that when people aren't feeling well in Japan and China, they wear masks. Nice. Especially since you're packed in on trains. I'd be happy if people continued to use them in the US... but we're just not as polite, and far more selfish.

[JedV]

Originally Posted by Dingus

What if we didn't even think about deaths? I don't want to get Influenza, even though I know I won't die from it. Getting the flu is terrible! If we fail to address COVID and just get it and deal with it, there is a chance that it becomes another Influenza, with enough infections globally to cause the diverse mutations that allow Influenza to be a new pandemic each year. Just imagine five COVID variants floating around, ON TOP of the already existing Influenza and common cold. How many viruses do we want to be dealing with as a species? How about we just take some common sense precautions to limit the infection rate and therefore limit the mutation rate and hopefully stop this long term? Oh and while we are knocking out COVID, we are also significantly curtailing Influenza! If we can drop Influenza infections globally in a single year it will have the effect of lessening the successive Influenza outbreaks for a couple more years to come.

We as a human race are interconnected whether we like it or not. Moreover, microorganisms pre-date us by billions of years, they are pretty good at doing what they do.

That would be awesome if we could snuff out these pathogens. Unfortunately it's easier said than done in a world of 7.8 billion people, globalized trade and travel... not to mention the numerous animal reservoirs (in the wild and in livestock) where the diseases will be maintained, mutate and get right back at us.

It doesn't take much for communicable disease to spread in the modern world.


A huge driver of this kind of disease spread is poverty. Living in close quarters, poor sanitation, low levels of education, not having sick days. For many it's a luxury to not go to work sick if it's a matter of survival for them and their family. And we're seeing now an epidemic of denial and disbelief.

[klodkrawler05]

Originally Posted by dysmike

People die from influenza all the time, so while it's unlikely.. I can't say I KNOW I'm not gonna die from it. I don't really care much, I HATE being sick. Why on earth would I even want to do that to myself?

It's why I get an influenza vaccine every year. Why I take more care when colds and the flu are circulating (wash my hands, don't go out if I'm not feeling well, etc). I thoroughly dug the fact that when people aren't feeling well in Japan and China, they wear masks. Nice. Especially since you're packed in on trains. I'd be happy if people continued to use them in the US... but we're just not as polite, and far more selfish.

That was one very nice part about Japanese culture. I was in Japan for 6 months when I first started my current job. That was the only winter I can ever remember in my whole life where I haven't gotten the flu/bug/whatever you call it at least once.

[Dingus]

Originally Posted by JedV

We as a human race are interconnected whether we like it or not. Moreover, microorganisms pre-date us by billions of years, they are pretty good at doing what they do.

That would be awesome if we could snuff out these pathogens. Unfortunately it's easier said than done in a world of 7.8 billion people, globalized trade and travel... not to mention the numerous animal reservoirs (in the wild and in livestock) where the diseases will be maintained, mutate and get right back at us.

It doesn't take much for communicable disease to spread in the modern world.


A huge driver of this kind of disease spread is poverty. Living in close quarters, poor sanitation, low levels of education, not having sick days. For many it's a luxury to not go to work sick if it's a matter of survival for them and their family. And we're seeing now an epidemic of denial and disbelief.

That is all well and good, but this isn't a binary outcome. We don't have to "snuff out" the pathogens, just make a significant dent. Less infections = less mutations = less reinfections. I just don't understand why death rate is so important to people. Maybe the marketing has been heavy handed and it is a reaction to that, but non-fatal infections are still something to fight against.

[JedV]

Originally Posted by Dingus

That is all well and good, but this isn't a binary outcome. We don't have to "snuff out" the pathogens, just make a significant dent. Less infections = less mutations = less reinfections. I just don't understand why death rate is so important to people. Maybe the marketing has been heavy handed and it is a reaction to that, but non-fatal infections are still something to fight against.

Agreed. We aren't going to eradicate anything, My assertion is that a dent, significant or otherwise will be difficult to sustain.

I also agree that focussing of death is problematic. The potential for physical disability, degradation of mental health, financial ruin for survivors with big hospital bills needs to be emphasized.