I agree the figures are problematic for a whole range of...

First 4 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Parsifal

17,095 Posts.

325

08/04/20

08:33

Post #: 43941118
Share

Originally posted by samb61: ↑

I think how they record the data is critical and at present it is not uniform. If someone has a serious underlying illness such as AIDS and contracts the virus they will have very little immunity, however they are recorded as a CV death if they succumb to pneumonia. Similarly if a person is 90 and in poor health, again if they have a trace of the virus it is recorded as causing their death even if they're body just gave up to Father Time. There is no uniform methodology across countries so it's near impossible to gauge the numbers. Also a country demographic such as age, health and wealth play a huge role. Italy is an old population and a lot of smokers, USA have an obesity problem and a health care system that favours the wealthy with an aging population. Is there an ethnic group who are more susceptible or over represented in the numbers? We do know that older males are more susceptible. If they had a uniform method of recording actual data it would make a lot more sense and may ease or increase people's anxiety but we would know what's really happening.

Expand

I agree the figures are problematic for a whole range of reasons. For example the note on the USA indicates that in New York at least they have abandoned testing those who die at home because they don’t have the resources to cope. So the US figures are likely underdone. Also of course they can only record known case and so when the testing is low the data Is likely wrong.

in any event I have looked a number of rankings and I still think that australia is doing much better than I expected. I’d rather be here than in Europe.
1 Upvote

Reply