COVID-19 is killing 20 times more people per week than flu does, new paper says

Just noticed this was the top trending article on livescience and decided to give it a geez and see if it had any validity. What I found was a total lack of validity and logic to the point of being outright deceptive disinfo. These are the types of articles and "studies" which really deserve a good debunking so lets get to it. The first thing we see in this article is "An image showing 35 coffins stored in a warehouse in Ponte San Pietro", then we get into the findings of this study from Harvard Medical School.

If there was any doubt that the new coronavirus isn't just "a bad flu," a new paper lays that myth to rest. The study authors found that in the U.S. there were 20 times more deaths per week from COVID-19 than from the flu in the deadliest week of an average influenza season.

COVID-19 is killing 20 times more people per week than flu does, new paper says

Ok, sounds like pretty scary stuff, so what exactly is the methodology used to arrive at this conclusion you ask? Well you see, they think it's not fair to compare the flu death numbers with Covid-19 numbers because our flu numbers are just an estimation, but we have "real numbers" for Covid-19:

This comparison is flawed because the CDC estimates of flu deaths are just that — estimates rather than raw numbers. The CDC does not know the exact number of people who become sick with or die from the flu each year in the U.S. Rather, this number is estimated based on data collected on flu hospitalizations through surveillance in 13 states.On the other hand, reported COVID-19 deaths are actual counts of people who died from COVID-19, not estimates. In other words, comparing estimates of flu deaths with raw counts of COVID-19 deaths is like comparing "apples to oranges," the authors said.

This does actually have some truth to it, it doesn't really make sense to compare these figures, it's an apples to oranges comparison. I've actually made this same argument several times over the last few months. The CDC website clearly states they don't have exact numbers for influenza and it's mainly because influenza deaths don't need to be recorded for people over 18 and it's not usually listed as a cause of death. I've also heard several doctors say the same thing, they list causes such as pneumonia but rarely list influenza as a direct cause of death.

Does CDC know the exact number of people who die from seasonal flu each year?

CDC does not know exactly how many people die from seasonal flu each year. There are several reasons for this. First, states are not required to report individual flu illnesses or deaths among people older than 18 years of age to CDC. Second, influenza is infrequently listed on death certificates of people who die from flu-related complications.

www.cdc.gov...

So how does this study suggest we make it more of an apples-to-apples comparison. Well isn't it obvious, you just count the cases of influenza where it was listed on the death certificate. This is what you call a truly big brain Harvard study.

So for the new study, the researchers looked at actual counts of flu deaths per week, and compared those with counts of COVID-19 deaths.

Based on data from death certificates, during the deadliest week of flu season over the last several years, the counted number of U.S. deaths due to flu ranged from 351 during the 2015 to 2016 flu season to 1,626 during the 2017 to 2018 flu season, the authors said. The average number of flu deaths during the week of peak flu mortality in recent seasons (from 2013 to 2020) was 752 deaths.

In contrast, for COVID-19, there were 15,455 deaths reported in the U.S. during the week ending April 21 (the highest weekly death toll during the pandemic so far) the authors said

So we have already established, according to the CDC themselves, that influenza is rarely listed as a cause of death and isn't even required to be reported in most cases, but you know what lets dig up the death certificates which do list it and then compare those to Covid-19, where doctors are directed to list Covid-19 on the death certificate even if it's only suspected the patient had Covid-19.

Not only that, if a person tests positive for Covid-19 and then dies of another pre-existing condition, they must still include Covid-19 on the death certificate, which then counts towards the Covid-19 death statistics. It was widely reported that around 99% of the people who died in Italy from Covid-19 had at least one or more serious underlying health condition, but they are all counted in the death statistics.

The authors note that their analysis has some limitations, including that the number of COVID-19 deaths may be undercounted because of limitations with testing for SARS-CoV-2 and false-negative test results. In addition, the authors point out that adult flu deaths are not required to be reported to public health authorities in the way that COVID-19 deaths are, potentially undercounting flu deaths as well.

Ah yes, it couldn't possibly be that we overestimated the severity of Covid-19, it's those pesky false-negatives which are causing us to actually underestimate it according to these big brains! At least at the end of the article they admit to using influenza numbers which are very unreliable... but it's still a completely valid result don't worry about it.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder
It is these dishonest statistic twisting fearmongers that are to blame for a lot of freaked out people.

Sure for those that are vulnerable and affected it is hell and I do not want to play down the misery and problems that come from a serious infection.

But the way this is done globally, I have been saying this in early January already to a friend that this looks like a testrun and the data they will collect will tell a lot about sheep behavior.

The division is strong with this topic, thank you for pointing out another statistic twisting lying piece of "journalism".

So how many people are dying this week, based on your understanding?

originally posted by: VariableConstant
So how many people are dying this week, based on your understanding?

I would say basically the same thing as Elon... take the death figures we have and reduce them by an order of magnitude, meaning something like 10x less people actually die as a result of Covid-19 then the statistics would suggest. But that's just my opinion based on the way doctors are recording the deaths, basically I would say it's about the same or less severe than a typical flu for everyone except older people.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Its a perfect lesson for most everyone and obviously us on ATS. You have to read past the headline.

This is what i hate. If i go tell someone in my family this... Its a conspiracy... Then ill say fine read it here then they deny its source... And I'm not a nut case either lol
/rant, sorry

Less then 1000 Japanese have died of the virus since Nov. of last year. You got to remember that over 500 Japanese companies were in Wuhan, China. So what happened to all the Japanese businessmen there. Sure, the Japanese govt. sent in 3 chartered planes, but what happened to those people on the planes.

Sorry to say this, but someone is out to destroy the European and North and South American market of employment and with that those nations WILL fall within.

So who is all behind this.


For some reason I've been posting about June 12th " a day of awakening". The date was not mentioned but " a day of awakening (translated from Japanese) a Japanese govt. official stated it on national TV. It seems now with my date, something is out in the dark that only a few can see. ( it may have to do with a timing of the days in the calendar )
Stay tune, folks.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Why did you critique the summary article in Live Science rather than the actual study?

Here's the actual study: JAMA - Assessment of Deaths From COVID-19 and From Seasonal Influenza

I don't want to say you were disingenuous in your review, but the link to the actual paper is in the article you trashed.

a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

So you intentionally reviewed the summary rather than the study?

Question asked and answered.

Disingenuous it is.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

Don't expect an answer to a direct question.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

Don't expect an answer to a direct question.

Can you answer the direct question?

If you want to critique a study, do you a) quote from the study b) quote from a cheesy summary article.

What seems more authentic to you?

Do you believe that ....?
Just saying.... it's likely in ten minutes time surfing, I could find surveys to the contrary.
I guess it just depends on what spin your selling ..(not you personally) the media always has an agenda, lobbyists and political direction.

Star

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

Don't expect an answer to a direct question.

Can you answer the direct question?

If you want to critique a study, do you a) quote from the study b) quote from a cheesy summary article.

What seems more authentic to you?

You are on record as saying that your question was asked and answered.
I am referring to what was asked of you.
But you knew that.
You are probably the most disingenuous poster on this site, IMO.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you think the article is misquoting the study authors or misrepresenting the study go ahead and explain how.

Don't expect an answer to a direct question.

Can you answer the direct question?

If you want to critique a study, do you a) quote from the study b) quote from a cheesy summary article.

What seems more authentic to you?

It is what is more practical...

If you have time to read and quote the study, then by all means knock yourself out.

As someone else asked, if there is some actual point / fact you disagree with then address it directly instead of attacking that the source article was a summary of said study.

Wish people would piss off with this now, covid was so last winter, go outside and take a look, nobody gives a # now. You guys are just scaring each other now in your online echo chambers.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I've also heard several doctors say the same thing, they list causes such as pneumonia but rarely list influenza as a direct cause of death.

I've tried to find the flu data. What is interesting is that on the CDC website, they list it as flu/pneumonia. On most of the charts, it isn't broken out. However, if you look at total flu/pneumonia deaths it is similar to Covid death numbers.

I've been a skeptic since day 1.

I believe Covid is real and does appear to be more deadly than the flu to a very small subset of the population who were already compromised health wise.

The numbers of that population and their high concentration in nursing / assisted living homes simply do not warrant this national shut down. There is absolutely no logical reason for what we are doing right now beyond either mass hysteria or some other nefarious purpose.

a reply to: butcherguy

And you go from thread to thread and your only comment is that you don't enjoy my posts. I get it. I don't care; and frankly, neither does anyone else.

The topic is an important one. The charge of scientific malfeasance that OP makes is a serious one. To then proceed to critique not the actual article but the summary intended for general consumption is both ridiculous and dangerous.

a reply to: Edumakated

Why is it any more practical to talk about a summary than the actual study? That's just patently absurd.

The OP is a critique of the summary, not the study. If you don't get that, or the problem with it, that's on you.

Some of you are so anxious to find anything that supports your chosen narrative that you're willing to compromise basic principals ...

Also, this topic is not about me.

Well , damn , if you count flu cases as COVID-19 , what did you think would happen?

I live in Pennsylvania. Yesterday our State Government changed their reporting standard and suddenly there are twice as many COVID deaths in our County than there was on Tuesday. This is at least the third or fourth time the State has changed the standards. County Coroners are questioning the State Health Department and are getting stonewalled.