37 comments

[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 99.5 ms ] thread
So cool, I have seen data visualisation for HIV, WW2 & 1 but not for Covid

(Why is this being downvoted lol?)

[flagged]
Yeah I'm not one of those "COVID is less deadly than the flu!1!1!" people or anything, but the reporting is so terrible for COVID that these numbers are very probably vastly over estimated (some European countries and some US states) and vastly under reported at the same time (China).

On the over estimated part, many many deaths are reported as COVID related even if COVID had nothing to do with their death or other factors caused their death.

[dead]
Died of any cause up to 60 days of a overly sensitive PCR test, that even it's creator said it can be very easily misused. We could only wish vaccine deaths were counted the same way

Slightly worse than the flu. But definetly over counted in developed nations, and overestimated in developing nations

Please don’t do this. Your comment history has quite a few violations of the guidelines[0].

     Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> please don’t do this

Do what exactly? And explain the basis of your accusation

Thanks. I could've been more verbose, but my point was/is correct.
On the bright side, flu numbers were pretty much nonexistent during the pandemic
I keep seeing this, but I have a hard time believing Covid is so much more contagious than the flu that it managed to spread like wildfire while the flu ceased to exist in the same timeframe. The entire narrative was that the US was terrible at mitigating the spread of Covid, but if the US was able to mitigate the flu with above and beyond success in that same time period, what anti-flu measures were taken that didn’t effect Covid?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number

One person with influenza spreads it to 1.3 people, on average. If mitigation measures bring that below 1.0, it slows down. We may have wiped out some influenza strains entirely (https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/09/covid-may-have-pushe...).

One person with COVID's early strain spreads to 2.9 people, and that was with massive societal mitigation measures in place.

Omicron's is listed as a whopping 9.5. Some of that likely includes reduced mitigation, but it's still enormous.

It's clearly substantially more infectious. Three generations of spread at 1.3 mean ~2 people infected; three generations at 9.5 mean ~850 people.

Flu has a lower R0 and thus is not spreading this quickly.

The Flu is/was suppressed by the measures more because its lower R0 was pushed down closer to 1 which prevented any exponential expansion that is commonly happening when people don't care (i.e. don't wear masks, socialize more and are lax about washing their hands).

(comment deleted)
This is cool, but it’s so overwhelming it’s hard to grasp. I think it would benefit from from like a scroll bar or something to get a sense of the progress (or lack thereof) while scrolling
… does your browser not have a scroll bar?

… it was so long I literally had to grab the thumb on mine to get to the bottom?

Safari on iPhone does not :(
You can quickly scroll through, that’s what I did.
Tip: Safari on iPhone does have a draggable scroll bar.

1. Scroll so the scroll bar shows.

2. Put your finger over the scroll bar.

3. Wait for the scrollbar to get bigger, with haptic feedback.

4. Now you can drag the scroll bar!

[dead]
[flagged]
That doesn't mean anything. If COVID gives you a heart problem and you die from that heart problem, you died from the heart problem. That COVID gave you. Why are we still discussing this 3 years on? We have excess deaths stats available now.
Where can we confirm this claim?

Specifically in the case of the official ONS data to which you responded l. I don’t disagree with what you say, but equally I also don’t agree with it unless you can show proof?

Actual numbers mean everything to me, you can enjoy your pixels and ruler based estimation, I’ll take my actual numbers.
Then you have a very naive view of reality. People, society, 'facts and numbers' are complex machines, and don't exist completely separate from anything else. There isn't some disease that just comes along and flicks an immediate 'off' switch, so dumbing it down to 'covid and nothing else' is like talking about a spherical cow in a vacuum.

Everyone has different histories, different immune systems, different current healths, different short and long-term health care availability. Knowing that COVID was in their system recently, and observing that covid can have noticeable impacts on your cardiovascular system, means that COVID is likely a contributing factor (to some degree, large or small) in their death.

But your numbers are nonsense. People who have only listed Covid as a cause shouldn't even exist because a virus alone doesn't really kill you. It needs to make some part of your body so sick that it breaks down. With Covid we know that it caused respiratory failures (which then should show up as a cause of death), heart issues, inflammation, stroke, etc.

Looking at cause of death doesn't get you any closer to assessing the mortality of this disease.

That's a clever abuse of data but, though this may come as a surprise to you, very few people actually die by means so traumatic (crushing, incineration, explosion) that it's impossible to determine which organ or necessary biological system failed critical to their death.

This same process would determine almost nobody has died of cancer, gunshot wounds, drowning, smoking, etc. as they lead to parts of one's body no longer functioning which in turn causes death, as opposed to some sort of central and essential death descending upon them.

You may even recall how this exact same handful of cases were used to "demonstrate" that doctors were just making it up as they couldn't explain the cause of death. May I refer you to the 1979 film The Jerk, as the main character exclaims "there's something wrong with these cans!" when they were, in fact, being shot by a sniper.

Thank you for listening to my TED talk

With all of that death, you'd think we'd have a worldwide moratorium on Gain of Function research and a massive international investigation into the EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology by now.

Nope. Back to the office, piggies.

If everyone wanted that research banned but China didn’t, where would that leave things?
The website shows 6,841,400 total deaths. That's a very "conservative" number.

Both The Economist [1] and the WHO [2] for instance say that the number may well be way more than the official one (The Economist is at 29+ million now).

I know firsthand for certain that there's a country in the world that LIED about the numbers (not underestimated, but LIED). I won't name the country.

I think it will be in the history manuals that the COVID-19 pandemic was one of the most, if not the most, devastating pandemic of the 21st century (maybe of the 20th century, too, for some countries [3]).

What is also shocking is the fact that many deaths are correlated with vaccine-skepticism (or to be more colloquial, covidiocy) [4]

[1] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/health/covid-global-death...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/20/covid-19-death...

[4] https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing...

Thanks to the vaccines I think Covid wasn't able to match the 1918 flu.
Well, this is a boring site, representing things with pixels isn't original, I was thinking maybe you placed the pixel geographically and one could see the spread of infections (or deaths), but it's just a boring "Get vaccinated!" PSA...

Since this might matter: Yes I'm vaxed, and with 3 booster shots.

Yeah pretty much late to the get vaccinated fun party!