Determining COVID-19’s lethality muddied by politics - Globalnews.ca | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Politics

Determining COVID-19’s lethality muddied by politics – Globalnews.ca

Published

 on


COVID-19’s lethality was always going to be a question for epidemiologists. But six months after the deadly coronavirus first gained international attention, politics has muddied the answer.

The two main agencies tracking the virus, the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, have access to the same raw data, yet disagree on the interpretation for determining the IFR, or infection fatality rate. To calculate IFR, scientists consider not only known infections, but also computer modelling to estimate undiagnosed and asymptomatic cases.

“We won’t know the true fatality of this disease until it is all said and done,” says University of Ottawa epidemiologist Dr. Raywat Deonandan.

In January, the WHO predicted COVID-19’s IFR would be 3.4 per cent, meaning three or four people out of every 100 infected would die. By comparison, the Spanish flu, which resulted in an estimated 50 million dead, had an IFR of two per cent.

Story continues below advertisement

Read more:
As U.S. hits 4 million coronavirus cases in record time, deaths are also surging

But with months of updated COVID-19 statistics to consider, the CDC and WHO have released new estimates, with the CDC putting COVID-19’s IFR at .65 per cent, much lower than the WHO’s prediction of one per cent.

“(One per cent) doesn’t sound like a big number,” says Deonandan. “That’s a big number. So a pretty bad case of the flu would give us an IFR about .1 per cent, so .5 per cent is five times bigger than that. And when you scale this up to the population levels, we’re looking at hundreds of thousands of people dead, as we know now. So this is a deadly disease.”

[ Sign up for our Health IQ newsletter for the latest coronavirus updates ]

But those aren’t the only numbers being used to fill the COVID-19 narrative, much to the dismay of the top infectious disease expert in the U.S. Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared exasperated when asked by reporters about the factually incorrect White House claim that the U.S. death rate was inflated because the U.S. tested more than other countries.

The U.S. (155,000 tests per million) has tested fewer people per million than Russia (178,000), the U.K. (205,000) and Israel (166,000), among others, according to the website Worldometer. Canada has tested 97,000 per million.






1:40
Coronavirus: Parts of the U.S. approaching more grim milestones as COVID-19 numbers climb


Coronavirus: Parts of the U.S. approaching more grim milestones as COVID-19 numbers climb

“It’s a false narrative to get caught up in lower death rates,” says Fauci.

Story continues below advertisement

Another metric used is the case fatality rate (CFR), which is the proportion of people who die from a disease compared to the total number of people diagnosed. But epidemiologists say the CFR can be misleading if a country either tests too much or too little. The quality of health care is also a factor.

And then there’s deaths per million, a metric that relies entirely on how diligent a specific country is in reporting deaths. Based on numbers compiled by Worldometer, Belgium is far and away the worst country for COVID-19 deaths with 846 per million, followed by the U.K. (669) and Spain (608). The U.S. (435) and Canada (235) are further down the list.

But it’s the comparison with India that shows how flawed “deaths per million” truly is. While India has the third most cases in the world, it has only reported 21 deaths per million.

Read more:
Mexico’s president dismissive of wearing mask as coronavirus cases climb

“I think the comparisons across countries can be problematic in the sense that nobody wants to be the worst-performing country,” says epidemiologist Ashleigh Tuite. “And so there is potentially a desire to not necessarily count things very well and not be the country who has the most deaths.”

India’s death registration system has been overwhelmed with the pandemic. Only those who previously tested positive for COVID-19 are included in the death toll. By contrast, authorities in Belgium have been criticized for being far too liberal in how they count the number of people who die as a result of the virus, leading to the country’s tourism minister to publicly worry that they were scaring off future tourists.

Story continues below advertisement

“But then (Belgium) became a news story,” says Tuite, “because why did they have such high fatality in their population? And so there’s certainly a bit of a disincentive to count and count well. And so I think transparency, particularly during a pandemic, is incredibly important. But there are absolutely disincentives to being transparent because you can be held up for criticism.”

There have been over 15.5 million COVID-19 cases reported in the world so far with over 630,000 deaths, both of which continue to rise.






1:40
Coronavirus: Parts of the U.S. approaching more grim milestones as COVID-19 numbers climb


Coronavirus: Parts of the U.S. approaching more grim milestones as COVID-19 numbers climb

© 2020 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Politics

Gould calls Poilievre a ‘fraudster’ over his carbon price warning

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Liberal House leader Karina Gould lambasted Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre as a “fraudster” this morning after he said the federal carbon price is going to cause a “nuclear winter.”

Gould was speaking just before the House of Commons is set to reopen following the summer break.

“What I heard yesterday from Mr. Poilievre was so over the top, so irresponsible, so immature, and something that only a fraudster would do,” she said from Parliament Hill.

On Sunday Poilievre said increasing the carbon price will cause a “nuclear winter,” painting a dystopian picture of people starving and freezing because they can’t afford food or heat due the carbon price.

He said the Liberals’ obsession with carbon pricing is “an existential threat to our economy and our way of life.”

The carbon price currently adds about 17.6 cents to every litre of gasoline, but that cost is offset by carbon rebates mailed to Canadians every three months. The Parliamentary Budget Office provided analysis that showed eight in 10 households receive more from the rebates than they pay in carbon pricing, though the office also warned that long-term economic effects could harm jobs and wage growth.

Gould accused Poilievre of ignoring the rebates, and refusing to tell Canadians how he would make life more affordable while battling climate change. The Liberals have also accused the Conservatives of dismissing the expertise of more than 200 economists who wrote a letter earlier this year describing the carbon price as the least expensive, most efficient way to lower emissions.

Poilievre is pushing for the other opposition parties to vote the government down and trigger what he calls a “carbon tax election.”

The recent decision by the NDP to break its political pact with the government makes an early election more likely, but there does not seem to be an interest from either the Bloc Québécois or the NDP to have it happen immediately.

Poilievre intends to bring a non-confidence motion against the government as early as this week but would likely need both the Bloc and NDP to support it.

Gould said she has no “crystal ball” over when or how often Poilievre might try to bring down the government

“I know that the end of the supply and confidence agreement makes things a bit different, but really all it does is returns us to a normal minority parliament,” she said. “And that means that we will work case-by-case, legislation-by-legislation with whichever party wants to work with us. I have already been in touch with all of the House leaders in the opposition parties and my job now is to make Parliament work for Canadians.”

She also insisted the government has listened to the concerns raised by Canadians, and received the message when the Liberals lost a Toronto byelection in June in seat the party had held since 1997.

“We certainly got the message from Toronto-St. Paul’s and have spent the summer reflecting on what that means and are coming back to Parliament, I think, very clearly focused on ensuring that Canadians are at the centre of everything that we do moving forward,” she said.

The Liberals are bracing, however, for the possibility of another blow Monday night, in a tight race to hold a Montreal seat in a byelection there. Voters in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun are casting ballots today to replace former justice minister David Lametti, who was removed from cabinet in 2023 and resigned as an MP in January.

The Conservatives and NDP are also in a tight race in Elmwood-Transcona, a Winnipeg seat that has mostly been held by the NDP over the last several decades.

There are several key bills making their way through the legislative process, including the online harms act and the NDP-endorsed pharmacare bill, which is currently in the Senate.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Voters head to the polls for byelections in Montreal and Winnipeg

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Canadians in two federal ridings are choosing their next member of Parliament today, and political parties are closely watching the results.

Winnipeg’s Elmwood —Transcona seat has been vacant since the NDP’s Daniel Blaikie left federal politics.

The New Democrats are hoping to hold onto the riding and polls suggest the Conservatives are in the running.

The Montreal seat of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun opened up when former justice minister David Lametti left politics.

Polls suggest the race is tight between the Liberal candidate and the Bloc Québécois, but the NDP is also hopeful it can win.

The Conservatives took over a Liberal stronghold seat in another byelection in Toronto earlier this summer, a loss that sent shock waves through the governing party and intensified calls for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to step down as leader.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Next phase of federal foreign interference inquiry to begin today in Ottawa

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – The latest phase of a federal inquiry into foreign interference is set to kick off today with remarks from commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue.

Several weeks of public hearings will focus on the capacity of federal agencies to detect, deter and counter foreign interference.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and key government officials took part in hearings earlier this year as the inquiry explored allegations that Beijing tried to meddle in the 2019 and 2021 federal elections.

Hogue’s interim report, released in early May, said Beijing’s actions did not affect the overall results of the two general elections.

The report said while outcomes in a small number of ridings may have been affected by interference, this cannot be said with certainty.

Trudeau, members of his inner circle and senior security officials are slated to return to the inquiry in coming weeks.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version