Hacker News Reader

Comment by stephsmithio | Hacker News Reader

I think headlines like these are extremely detrimental to the global fight of this virus.

Whether or not you're at risk (age, health problems, etc), you are a vehicle for transporting the virus and so while there is no need for "panic", it's both respectful and pragmatic to distance so that the virus can be contained.

View on HN

Why? Shouldn't the truth be known? Wouldn't it be wise to know actual stats vs/ trying to hide the truth in order to propagate undue panic? Then discuss it, and options, as how to move forward with correct information vs/ guesses and/or rumors?

It's sad that this report was downvoted on a site (HN) that is supposed to be so analytical.

In a perfect world where everyone reacts rationally sure. However, the actual reaction to this information is that individuals deem themselves not a risk and go about their daily lives. Unfortunately they are endangering everyone who is at risk in the process.

Yeah, there's so much complexity here that a simple number could lead someone to miss.

So, 99% of those who died had another illness. Almost everyone has illnesses, so what kinds are we talking about?

A patient surviving doesn't mean the patient didn't need intensive medical care.

So you survived, are there any long-term symptoms you'll have to learn to live with?

I've also heard that (at least in some contexts) a "mild" case of COVID-19 is defined as one that didn't need breathing assistance. That's not the colloquial definition of "mild."

The article raising interesting points but there is still not enough information to make an evaluation. I'm more interested in some kind of quantification of how many years of life corona virus is taking from its victims. You could imagine a hypothetical grim reaper virus that kills you a day before you would otherwise die. This virus kills absolutely everybody in the country but it is probably not worth fighting unless it is super cheap to do so.

Exactly. In this study of 207 infected patients, the chief complaint of 99 people during admission to the ER was GI distress. How many people have not sought help because they only have GI issues?

https://journals.lww.com/ajg/Documents/COVID_Digestive_Sympt...

That is an interesting study but your summary isn't accurate. Over half of those digestive symptoms are anorexia not what would usually be called GI distress. 41 of the 99 with digestive symptoms had more specific GI issues, mostly diarrhea. Only 7 of the 99 had no respiratory symptoms and they did not say if any had only digestive symptoms.

Instead of correlating outcomes by age because age is so easy to measure, it would be more useful to correlate them by comorbidity since that seems more relevant. And might provide some slight peace of mind to fit and healthy 65 year olds.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com