1 Of 500.000: guided epidemiologists calculated the risk of death by covid-19

And recommend maps-made protection measures for risk groups

To avoid misunderstandings right at the beginning: The specification in the title refers to the number of people in Germany aged up to 65 years, which until 4. April according to the official statement on the coronavirus. These were 1.7 per million or just a little less than one per half a million. In the hotspot Spain, the over-80s met a 420. This makes the framework of the risk of death from the minimum of the maximum.

One of the worldwide epidemiologists, John Ioannidis von Stanford University, looked at two colleagues for the publication submitted, but not yet assessed study the age distribution at the Corona victims more closely. Since this study was not mentioned in my research at the scilogs, Telepolis or the Day show, I hereby attention to the results. First but still a remark to the ruling politicians.

How politicians give trust

In discussions, I encountered several times the objection, rather authority prasidents like those of the US or Brazil had played the danger of the coronavirus far too long. That’s why you can criticize that. But then you can not forget that ruling politicians of almost all countries still in February asholic deeds and then in Germany, for example, in Germany only middle Marz thumbnailed, during which one previously prominently promised travelers to make questionnaires.

A similar turnaround is characterized by the breathing masks: First it won all the time, these were nothing to bring. Now you should be mandatory in some places. Incidentally, the effectiveness of numerous basic hygiene rules, according to a WHO study, is not scientifically proven (COVID-19: WHO study hardly events for the effectiveness of single collection measures). Evidence-based policies goes differently.

Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn said in a Bundestag debate, you will have to forgive a lot of each other in the next few months (thanks for the reader note). Forgive one must probably first that appropriate risk analyzes were in the drawers of the ministries without having to do something. Therefore, many European and American countries have caught cold from the pandemic. This has costed human life.

Forgiveness would also have to forgive the savings in health care, where the staff with ever new Burocratic constructs produced and with efficiency-optimizing macers above all at the cost point "person" branch. It requires a crisis from the ejection of the coronavirus to make it clear that not only medicines, but the entire staff in the nursing and healing professions is crucial: of importance for life of numerous people.

The shortage of resources in health care and their consequences are therefore homemade. Another remark on gender or gender equality policy: for years – or probably rather decades – women are invited to go stronger into the technical professions. Salopp said many women still decide to do that, dear "Something with people" close. There is a highly superior finding from the PISA survey of 2018:

Among the schoolers in mathematics or science, in Germany, about a quarter of the boys – but only an eighth of the Madchen – thus to be tig as an engineer or scientist at the age of 30 years. About a quarter of the powerful Madchen goes out to spend a health profession. Among the powerful boys, this is the case for less than a tenth of the case. Only 7% of young and 1% of the girls in Germany believe that they will be in the ICT area.

Germany – LandersOze – Results PISA 2018, S. 7

According to the gender or gender equality policy, we were still in the future in the future in the healthcare system. In order to compensate for the politically desired migration of women from the people of the people in technology professions, one had either more manner in human professionals or bring more immigrants into the country. The latter was once again for outcry at the right edge, that "the foreigner" take us away the work.

What should this excursus in the Corona crisis? He shows that politicians often cause the problems they promise to dissolve themselves. Women earn too little? Well, then just begins to better pay people in the nursing professions! And these are often enough your own employees at the state level. Or those of corporations that you have completely burned with privatizations.

The Covid-19 dementia risk

That we still do not know exactly how many people as a result of a coronavirus infection severely sick or die, is above all the absence of representative studies. I am unacceptable why we are still in the dark towards the end of April. If, as Charite virologist ride straight against the FAZ, that since the third Marchwoche has been weekly about 300.000 Corona tests have been carried out, you had easy 2.000 to 10.000 reserve for reprasive studies, as I am on the 8. April demanded (numbers and logic of the Corona crisis).

Mind you, it’s not just about a pure insight interest. For the assessment of the congratability of the largest fundamental rights intervention in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany – Say: Since Nazi terrorism – the question of Reliability co-decisive. And for that we have to know, a) how dangerous the virus really is and b) how strong the restricted macers hinder the distribution of the virus.

That instead of burgers and burgers lately with so dramatic and misunderstanding numbers "New infections" naughty, all likely to give a statistically distorted image (from the lack of scientific reasons of Corona mails), as in quoted FAZ article now probably also premises, in my opinion is difficult forgiveness. I hope so that the courts also ask the maws again strongly on their behavior. And the calculations of John Ioannidis and colleagues can be informative.

As reported, they unfortunately only refer the data to the 4. April. According to the researchers, most of them were considered in their analysis – concrete: Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland, as well as the US states Louisiana, Michigan and Washington, and finally New York City – to this Time but already about the mountain of coronavirus infections and Covid-19 breakups. Therefore, nothing was allowed to endanger the basic results so far.

Since we do not know the actual risk of the coronavirus, thanks to lack of reprintage studies, the analyzes of Ioannidis and Co. Notes on macroscopic level. The epidemiologists, namely, compared the number of COVID-19 attributed deaths for different countries involving age and, where potential pre-existing conditions of those affected. This also explains the landing and state list, because only for these areas was the required data available.

A macroscopic view

Input, these researchers also criticize the dramatizing representations in the media:

The media have highlighted trap young, healthy individuals with severe, deadlines. However, the coarse part of the patients dying with SARS COV-2 is old and the rough majority of the deceased may have serious pre-existing conditions. In response to the pandemic, exaggerations should be avoided.

Ioannidis, Axfors Contopoulos-Ioannidis, 2020, S. 4; DT. oversight. D. A.

The avoidance of exercises in medicine reporting also offers parents paragraph 14 of the German Press Code. With the inclusion of the up to 4. April available data comes the epidemiologists to the following result:

The officially determined deaths for Covid-19, based on age and gender of those affected. For details on the collection of the data I refer to the original work of the three researchers.

Due to their numbers, John Ioannidis and colleagues now calculate pracisse that people in the age of 65 had a 34 to 73 times lower risks in the above-mentioned European countries to die in Covid-19 than the ages. In the US regions, the difference was lower and was only a 13- to 15 times lower risk. The researchers explain through socio-demographic factors, say: especially poverty and lack of access to the health system.

As far as we have copied with relative numbers. For a better understanding, the absolute numbers follow here (again until including 4. April):

1 out of 500,000: leading epidemiologists calculated the risk of death by COVID-19

The officially determined death enclosure due to CovID-19, based on the age of those affected and relative to the population. For details on the collection of the data I refer to the original work of the three researchers.

These numbers give us a better impression about how dangerous the coronavirus is now. Herein, the 1.7 death encloses in Germany per million in the young people who mentioned I mentioned. In the difficult Spain, it was at the ages. 2300 per million – where around 3 million over-80-year-old life in the country. In Spain "caught" it until 4. April so every 420. the above-80-year-old, in Germany every 6000. In this age group.

The researchers in detail also discuss some more detailed, such as pre-diseases – namely cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, chronic respiratory diseases, kidney failure, heavy liver disease, immunogous and vicious tumors and age differences in the group of to-65-year-old influence the risks.

The three epidemiologists concludes the idea of comparing the risks through the coronavirus with the risks in the strain traffic. For this, they raised the data for the traffic totes Pro with a motor vehicle-based kilometer for each of the regions mentioned. This gives the following picture:

1 out of 500,000: leading epidemiologists calculated the risk of death by COVID-19

The risks of the coronavirus since the outbreak of the pandemic in the respective region for the up-to-6-year-old, printed in daily kilometers with a motor vehicle. For details on the collection of the data I refer to the original work of the three researchers.

In other words, the Corona crisis has so far been lifelike, such as (since the outbreak of the pandemic), a distance of 14.5km with the car, motorcycle, truck and so on. The highest value is, the danger was the virus in comparison in this country. Because logically, the risk for a traffic accident is gross, when you return 50 or 100km than if you only drive 15km. In the words of the scientists:

Based on the data until 4. April corresponds to mortality by COVID-19 (viewed from the first day on which the respective region has been recorded a death) for a bis-65-year-old in the back of 14.5 to 667.7km in a motor vehicle. In doing so, most analyzed infection herd were at the lower end of this spectrum, where the risk is moving about the same level, as in the case of a traffic in the day-to-day shuttle transport.

Ioannidis, Axfors Contopoulos-Ioannidis, 2020, S. 13; DT. oversight. D. A.

The researchers are restricted to concern:

We should surrender that we focused on mortality risk and not on hospitalization. Empirical data show that COVID-19 has the potential to cause certain hospitals. This is especially true where the hospitalians already operate under normal circumstances at the maximum of their capacity and where they provide high-risk populations and in the city with high population density and coarse meetings in mass events. Therefore, the preparation of hospitalizers is essential, irrespective of whether the risk of death in general population is very low.

Ioannidis, Axfors Contopoulos-Ioannidis, 2020, S. 13; DT. oversight. D. A.

Conclusion

In view of the lack of representative data from the leading politicians and struggles of the Coronavirus, the calculations of John Ioannidis and his colleagues constitute an interesting alternative. Of course, in their results, the consequences of the protective measures in the various regions and the capacities of the respective health systems are included.

This definitely shows that SARS-COV-2 is not a danger of killer virus and that it is largely immeasurable for people aged up to 65 years and without pre-existing diseases, if there is sufficient health care for them. This is not said that one should allow free dissemination of the virus, but the need for a hard lockdown is called into question. In addition, the three scientists:

The absolute death risk does not exceed 0.24% even in the highest age category and even in the largest infection herds and is smaller than one per thousand on most places. These risks could still be high enough to justify high alertness and suggest that you should be regardless of the chosen strategy in response to Covid-19 now or in fine epidemic waves a special focus on the protection of the oldest individuals. […]

Aggressive macers like Lockdowns were introduced in many countries. This is a completely justified ‘safe-actual-sure’ approach in the absence of good data. Long-term Lockdowns could have great side effects for health (as suicides, deteriorated mental health, cardiovascular diseases, the loss of health insurance for unemployment and so on) in the overall society.

Ioannidis, Axfors Contopoulos-Ioannidis, 2020, S. 16; DT. oversight. D. A.

The epidemiologists conclude on the data from Iceland to skate the death rate of corona infected. In this small country, many people were tested and the data is therefore particularly good. Thus, the death rate could be 0.1% or one of a thousand of all infected and was moved in the magnitude of the seasonal flu. Now you need mab-made losses that also take into account the social life and the economic functioning.

I could still add that Corona also in the sense of a "second flu" can be dangerous, just when it harvests the capacities of the health system. So we arrived again at the political level, where we started.

I doubt that the now prescribed and a few weeks ago still called mask obligation is the right way out. In the Netherlands you try it with one "intelligent lockdown". Coarse events up to another seems to me a meaningful maaking. Incible social life should be adhered to certain hygiene acceptance, whose mode of action is also scientifically occupied by WHO studies.

Life will continue and, despite certain, quantifiable risks, most of us move in the day as well as self-consuming. In my opinion, it came 2020/2021 anyway to the next economic crash – because of the declining global economy, which still does not populate debt problem and other crisis herds in the world in the EU.

Let’s see the Coronapandemie as an opportunity to give the virus blame for it and avoid coarse distortions. So far, far-reaching auxiliary changes were just as justified around the globe. But it was a troubled to ame that all problems are solved. Especially during epidemic protection, but also in the monetary and economic system, the ruling politicians have finally had to make their homework and the conclusions needed for peaceful and sustainable coexistation.

This article also appears in the blog "People pictures" of the author.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: