Get best of the week

Coronavirus: a dangerous illusion of mortality

An irresponsible press begins to fill our information field with news about the victims of coronavirus, although neither the attending physician nor the WHO voices such information. Due to their carelessness, journalists de facto name the causes of death. And this small inaccuracy in the wording is of tremendous importance for society. Today, it is imperative not to confuse the overall mortality of people with confirmed coronavirus and mortality directly from coronavirus.

We all saw frightening numbers among those killed with a positive test for Covid-19. But the high percentage of mortality that we observe is an illusion, because for the most part we look at natural mortality, which would have happened without infection, because the reason was something else. That is, the death rate from infection is as if multiplied by the natural, and we see the result of this multiplication, although we need to look at the particular.

Allegorically, the day of death for everyone is predetermined, and many people with coronavirus who have gone to another world would die anyway. We do not know their number, but we can calculate the risks based on probability theory. To do this, we need to compare the overall mortality with mortality in the presence of infection.

In my previous article, “Coronavirus: how we deceive ourselves,” I already demonstrated the difference between mortality using Italy’s demographic data for one age group. And now I want to share freshschedule by David Spiegelhalter, eminent statistician at the University of Cambridge. He had at his disposal the full amount of UK data from Imperial College London.

Data table + same values ​​on a logarithmic scale

UFO Care Minute


The pandemic COVID-19, a potentially severe acute respiratory infection caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (2019-nCoV), has officially been announced in the world. There is a lot of information on Habré on this topic - always remember that it can be both reliable / useful, and vice versa.

We urge you to be critical of any published information.


Official sources

, .

Wash your hands, take care of your loved ones, stay at home whenever possible and work remotely.

Read publications about: coronavirus | remote work

In comparing the annual mortality and mortality among people with a positive test for Covid-19, we clearly see the coincidence of the shape of the curve. And the ratio between the absolute values ​​varies from 0.5 to 2, and in the age group under 50 it is on average less than unity. Consequently, the background or natural mortality of people is often even greater than with coronavirus.

How can we compare the annual value and data for a new disease, which is only a few months old ?! - There were many such comments on my last article . Some even suggested that mortality in coronavirus be multiplied by a quotient between 12 months and a certain time period for infection. But they all misunderstand the meaning of the interval and confuse sweets with sugar. Probabilities work differently.

Equality between mortality rates does not mean that coronavirus kills as many people during an epidemic as all other diseases in a year. These are different probabilities. By the way, mortality with a massive heart attack will be significantly greater than that with Covid-19.

Equality between the coefficients means that the probability of dying from a coronavirus is equivalent to the probability of not living another year. In other words, the danger of a new infection is equal to the danger of everyday life throughout the year. Those convinced of the opposite forget that the coronavirus still needs to get sick first and only then die from it.

It is also important to mention that all of these risks are medium risks for people of the appropriate age, but not risks for the average person. This is due to the fact that most of the risk is borne by people who are already chronically ill. For the vast majority of healthy people, the risk of dying from Covid-19 or dying from something else is much lower than the above values.

That is why David Spiegelhalter in his publication speaks of the importance of the spread of infection in order to avoid overloading the national health system, which could lead to an increase in background mortality.

And here an extremely difficult dilemma arises. Everyone calls for a smoothing of the incidence curve in order to evenly distribute the load on the healthcare system. However, tough suppression measures and vigilant supervision of each coughing person also overload this system.

But what if it is much more difficult to predict reality than it seems and all the models showing scary exhibitors are lying shamelessly?

Chthonic abyss in Italy


I think many of you have heard stories about crowded morgues and that fierce horror happening on the land of Michelangelo. But let us think in specific categories, and not rely on the abundance of panic in social networks. Coronavirus did not arrive in Europe yesterday and we have a schedule with the number of deaths that includes the first 12 weeks of 2020.

Does anyone observe new extremum points? I suggest still looking at a similar schedule purely for Italy, which was also prepared by researchers from EuroMOMO .



Looking at the image above, we clearly see that the new peak value is at the same level with the flu epidemic in the winter of 2016. Yes, data may be delayed, but it is worth remembering the theses of hysteria that the real prevalence of coronavirus is much wider. And this is indeed so - official statistics are objectively unable to take into account all cases of infection.

Therefore, one can quote the words of the mayor of Bergamo about the number of deaths in his small town for some reason , but the fact remains that no more people died in Italy in early 2020 than at the beginning of 2017. Even a retrospective analysisthat dangerous winter, testifying to 25,000 excess deaths. And here the question arises: how does it turn out that in 2017 their health care system worked stably and did not require the emergency measures that are being taken today?

According to WHO data from March 31, more than 100,000 coronavirus infected were detected in Italy and 11,000 deaths were recorded among them. At the same time, the bed fund exceeds 200,000 beds. According to the experience of Chinawe know that hospitalization is required for 13.8% of those infected, and intensive care is needed for 4.7%. Round the first value to 15%. That is, about 15,000 people needed a hospital. How could 7.5% of the non-simultaneous burden on the health system cause such a critical destabilization of the system?

Do not forget that above I gave you the numbers on the last day of March, and the problems in medical institutions in Italy began much earlier. Therefore, I unequivocally affirm that the overload is caused not by the number of people in need of treatment, but by an excessive amount of effort devoted to diagnosis. If doctors in 2017 began to put everyone in the hospital with suspected flu, then the collapse would be even larger.

The measures taken limit the resources of national health care and this is similar to chemotherapy without the need. In California, for example, there was an acute shortage of nurses because quarantine forbids students from practicing in hospitals. In Germany, doctors with a positive covide test must be self-insulating and often difficult to replace. I am sure that such contradictions are observed everywhere.

Plus, there is still the risk of the so-called nosocomial infections with which the patient becomes infected in the hospital. According to NNIS estimates , nearly 2 million such cases occur in the United States each year, resulting in 99,000 deaths, a third of whichassociated with pneumonia! You just think about the potential degree of absurdity of what is happening.

Countries rushed to save the population from the pseudo-bubonic plague of our time, threatening the entire health care system. However, today there is no convincing evidence that a new sore is much more dangerous than flu. The only reason for nosophobia is computer models with frightening exhibitors. Man allowed himself to think that he is able to predict the future.

With all the current technologies and a centuries-old set of climate information, our weather forecast does not always coincide with reality. The quality, completeness and volume of data are fundamental, and in the case of a pandemic, there are none of these attributes. By the way there is a very good article, which shows how, from a supposedly simple and obvious model with the multiplication of three easily measured digits, the task turns into a difficult cohort analysis with dozens of factors and a high uncertainty coefficient.

Millions of people believed in the dubious result of computer computing, although the scientific community did not reach consensus. Researchers are busy with their own business, and they themselves are talking about unidentifiability in model calibrations and too high variability. Therefore, the main problem is not scientists, but the thoughtless interpretation of their works by journalists and experts from social networks.

Cumulative Cognitive Distortion


It is known that it all started with China. Statistics on coronavirus in the Celestial Empire became the basis for making first decisions in many other countries. And on March 31, the head of the Disease Control Department of the State Health Committee of the People's Republic of China, Chiang Jile, told The Wall Street Journal that starting April 1, they would begin to publish data on asymptomatic infected people.

My surprise at this news cannot be expressed in literary language. That is, before that, we observed statistics purely for those Chinese who had symptoms? Can you imagine what asymmetry of the data this fact may indicate? In this case, our idea of ​​mortality is overstated by multiple! However, I admit the possibility of understatement or pulling words out of context on the part of American journalists. Therefore, let's talk a little about something else. Are Italians 10 times more susceptible to the virus than Germans? In pursuit of confirmation of this hypothesis, many stories have already appeared on the Internet with discussions about national immunity and vaccination . I hasten to question the insight of such thinkers, for the main difference must be sought in the source data.





If we study the statistics of the two countries on citizens with a positive test, we will see that in Italy, among infected people, 55% are over 60, in Germany there are only 24%. And according to the latest data from the Italian National Institute of Health ISS, the average age of deaths with a positive test for coronavirus is about 81 years. 90% of deaths over 70 years. How much do you think one is related to the other?



Surely for some, the explanation for this situation will be the assertion that the elderly are at risk. This thesis came to us from China. But I already told you about background mortality and its interpretation. The older the person, the greater the likelihood of his death. For example, at the age of 85, the chance of not surviving to 86 is approximately 10%, without any viruses.

Equally important, 80% of deceased Italians suffered from two or more chronic diseases, and only 1% of those killed were healthy people (without chronic diseases). However, let's still look at the dynamics of the number of deaths among Italians aged 65 years and older from the local Ministry of Health .



This is what happens, all the media tell us that pensioners die from flies from coronavirus, and the absolute number of deaths in this age group during the period of influenza epidemic 2016-2017 was much greater? The false opinion is so widespread that I won’t be surprised if the objective reality of yours raises doubts and the question “why are we being deceived?”.

Throughout the story, I operated on rigorous facts, but now I will allow myself one assumption. Society independently misleads itself and does it unconsciously. It seemed to me a very remarkable case in Los Angeles , when a 33-year-old woman was refused a Covid-19 test because she was not at risk.

Obviously, any sore by the young body is better tolerated. Having believed in the thesis about the special danger of coronavirus for old people and testing them first of all, we only do what we work to confirm this thesis. This is similar to a kind of confirmation bias on a macro scale. And there is no illustration that is better than the one that you now see on the screen.



The Netherlands only checks severe cases, and Iceland tests everyone, even asymptomatic ones. Who do you think will have more mortality among older people with confirmed Covid-19? I also remind you that coronavirus may not be the only reason for complication among those who have it detected in the Netherlands. That is, the overall picture of the world can be distorted beyond recognition.

If I will only testLobmardic grandfathers with a cough brought to me by ambulance, then the mortality rate for this group will be as high as possible. After all, let’s say, the initial probability of death in a person who has visited a medical facility independently is much greater than that of someone who is traveling by ambulance. The permissible liberty of statistics is surprising.

Most people, looking at the increase in the number of infected people, associate it primarily with the spread of coronavirus. But according to a study by the Robert Koch Institute, an increase in the number of positive test results is proportional to an increase in the number of tests. This may indicate that the increase in the number of cases of the disease is mainly associated with an increase in the number of tests, and not with the ongoing epidemic.

Apotheosis


There is no methodological integrity in all data. It is not known for certain whether journalists are right about the changes in Chinese accounting, but the fact that this has become news for WSJ , Financial Times , Bloomberg , The Hill and others is a huge ambiguity problem in itself. There should be a common standard and understanding in any statistics, but they are not there and it is WHO's fault. And the world believed in apocalyptic models collected from this mess.

Note that until now I have been discussing the feasibility of measures to combat coronavirus without taking into account the cost of these measures. Now is the time to talk about the damage to the economy. In connection with global quarantine, Goldman Sachs announced its forecast for a decrease in US GDP in the II quarter to 24%. Morgan Stanley cited the figure for a decline in GDP of 30%, with unemployment rising to 12.8% from the current 3.5%.



The number of calls to the labor exchange in the United States has reached an absolute peak for the entire existence of the labor exchange. This happened a week ago, and yesterday it became known that the peak doubled. For those who see only a curve in the image, I’ll say that I see great sorrow, drunkenness, banditry, death, falling birth rates and much more. Forgive me for such a clumsy comparison, but for me this curve is worse than the frames on September 11th.

Despite some experience in financial analysis, it’s difficult for me to reason on a macro scale, but I believe that our economic structure will lead to less damage - for example, losses in the tourism segment will differ by many times. However, the more panic will be and the longer the quarantine will be, the closer we will be to the numbers above.

I understand that all of the above comes into strong resonance with today's news agenda. But I am trying to discreetly talk about what is there so far, everyone who has mastered the introductory course on computer modeling or just knows how to multiply three parameters, confidently talks about what will happen. I also understand that for many specialties it is often more important than common sense. Therefore, I share a summary of the opinions of professionals:

  • , , Covid-19 , , . , , « » . , « » , . , , , Covid-19, .
  • , Covid-19 , . , , , . « », . , 3 000 000 50000 .
  • , , , - , - , .
  • , Covid-19 1% . , «» «» Covid-19, , .
  • Covid-19, : , . « , , », — . - .
  • , Covid-19 , Covid-19 .
  • (EbM) Covid-19: « , . ».
  • , « » « ». , , , .
  • , Covid-19 . , , , , .
  • , , , Covid-19 , , 0,01% — 0,06% , , . .
  • « », «» .
  • , , , . , , .
  • , , , Covid-19.

All statements I accidentally met on the website of Swiss Propaganda Research .

If you have read the entire scribble and agree with my arguments, then do not be lazy to share this article with your friends. Many thanks to all for your attention.

Sincerely, Ilya Pestov, author of Groks.

More articles:


All Articles