4 thoughts on “Viral Myths: a response to my critics (Part 2)”

  1. Posted 25/02/2021 at 09:19 | Permalink

    A major problem with this analysis is the assumption that countries attibute deaths to Covid using the same criteria. It is well known this is not true. For example, Belgium’s high death rate is largely a result of this artifact.

  2. Posted 25/02/2021 at 12:56 | Permalink

    Ben – have a look at this dataset here, which compares recorded Covid deaths to excess deaths.
    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker
    For a lot of low- and middle-income countries, it makes a huge difference. For high-income countries, however, the two are almost perfectly correlated. That’s true over time, it’s true across countries, and it’s true across regions within countries.
    When Covid deaths go up, excess deaths go up. When Covid deaths go down, excess deaths go down. When Covid deaths are clustered in particular regions, excess death figures are also clustered in the same regions. As long as you’re only comparing developed countries (which is what I do in the above article and in the report itself), the measurement/classification problems don’t apply.

  3. Posted 25/02/2021 at 15:33 | Permalink

    It might also be instructive to look at variations in death rates following hospital admission between different hospitals and regions in the UK and also compared to other countries . I am led to believe that the death rates varied wildly in the UK which does suggest that some hospitals may have performed poorly (albeit you would expect some variation because of uncertainties initially as to best treatment practice – but the time it takes to disseminate best practice can tell us quite a lot about the efficiency of a healthcare system).

  4. Posted 26/02/2021 at 12:57 | Permalink

    HJ – it might do, but whether hospitals admit may also be a feature of the healthcare system

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.