It should go without saying, but as we do more testing, we find more cases, and more deaths. The number of infected (1,166,098 ) and number of deaths (67,596) is likely many times higher than the official numbers because we’re not testing enough.
In Minnesota: The confirmed death toll in the state since the start of the pandemic is now 395, with 6,228 confirmed cases as the state has ramped up testing.
[mprnews.org]covid19-in-mn?utm_campaign=MPR+News+-+AM+Edition_Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utmsource=sfmc&utm_content=
6
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
7 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.The truest measure of the effect of COVID 19 is looking at the official total death stats and comparing them with previous years. The amount of people who died in March in the UK increased by over 50% (from 10k up to 16k), and that was before the virus really got going.
MrBeelzeebubbles
Level 7
May 3, 2020
1
Exactly. That's why Marmalade Mussolini refuses to give states testing kits.
He loves saying: "America is doing great because of me!"
LiterateHiker
Level 9
May 3, 2020
1
Now knowing the real numbers is deadly to all of us. I’ve been in regular contact with my Democratic Representative to ask her to include mandatory minimum number of test kits and free testing be provided both to private and public providers in their next COVID19 package. Her response is she is following whatever Dem leadership thinks is best. Democrats have the majority in the House. They control what legislation passes and what doesn’t pass. I urge everyone represented by a Democrat to demand they do not pass one more relief bill without comprehensive testing included in the package.
I find this sentence confusing. "The reported number of infected (1,166,098 ) and number of deaths (67,596) Is likely many times higher than the official numbers.". The numbers quoted here are the official numbers. So how can the official numbers be many times higher than the official numbers? Perhaps there is a typo somewhere. By definition, the unreported numbers are going to be higher than these numbers. Randomized testing can help the civic organizations better estimate these numbers.
shivasregal
Level 5
May 3, 2020
0
The sentence should be recast to state actual numbers are higher then the reported numbers due to a low rate of testing. I’ll update it. Thanks.
Only a tiny fraction of those infected have symptoms severe enough to be reported or treated, while it is hard to overlook a death. That means that the percentage killed is extremely low—much lower than the official figures.
WilliamFleming
Level 8
May 3, 2020
1
We don’t know the percentage killed because the number of dead tested pre- or post-mortem is extraordinarily low.
This is an extremely important point. The morbidity rate ascribed to this virus confounds so many factors that it is an entirely meaningless metric. The variability by demographic, clinical, interventional, and remediating factors is very poorly quantified. On top of all of these factors, the tests themselves have varying powers. So it is frightening that many people without any background in the subject are making alarmist or optimistic remarks in all kinds of public forums.
@Bobbyzen Are you telling me that people sick enough to be hospitalized with the symptoms of Coronavirus and who subsequently die are not getting tested for the Coronavirus? I don’t believe that.
@WilliamFleming There are many scenarios beyond what you mention. For example, there are 10s of millions of people who have no health insurance or crappy insurance and do not go to doctors or hospitals. For another, people have been found dead in their homes and were not tested for lack of test kits. The AP just published a story that less than half of all states have tested 2% of their populations.
The cynical part of me suspects that's why the government isn't really trying to improve testing. If we can't test, the numbers stay artificially low. Then they can pat themselves on the back for a job well done (and brag about it on the campaign trail) while opening up restaurants and other public spaces (like campaign rallies.)
dkp93
Level 8
May 3, 2020
4
I don’t think you’re being cynical. Your take is based in reality.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.