Is Covid19 more deadly than Flu?

[mindlight]

Having gotten into a debate on the weekend with an antimasker I became more aware of an argument doing the rounds about how covid19 is no more deadly than flu.

Reading up on this I found this article from national geographic which suggests covid19 is 50-100 times more deadly.

How scientists know COVID-19 is way deadlier than the flu

But the death rate seems to have declined considerably since this article was written, possibly due to a new awareness of asymptomatic infections due to extensive testing. My latest readings are that the Infection-Fatality rate for Flu is <0.1% and that of covid19 somewhere between 0.65% and 1.46%. This would make covid19 between 6 and 15 times more deadly. Add in a longer incubation time and higher natural Reproduction rate and the disease is clearly far more of a threat.

Does any body have any more recent research on this? How would you argue with someone who thought that the science did not support the view that covid19 was more deadly?

 

[Aussie Pete]

Having gotten into a debate on the weekend with an antimasker I became aware of an argument doing the rounds about how covid19 is no more deadly than flu.

Reading up on this I found this article from national geographic which suggests covid19 is 50-100 times more deadly.

How scientists know COVID-19 is way deadlier than the flu

But the death rate seems to have declined considerably since this article was written, possibly due to a new awareness of asymptomatic infections due to extensive testing. My latest readings are that the Infection-Fatality rate for Flu is <0.1% and that of covid19 somewhere between 0.65% and 1.46%. This would make covid19 between 6 and 15 times more deadly. Add in a longer incubation time and higher natural Reproduction rate and the disease is clearly far more of a threat.

Does any body have any more recent research on this? How would you argue with someone who thought that the science did not support the view that covid19 was more deadly?

The reason that COVID is more dangerous is that it is way more easily spread. Older people are likely to suffer more severe symptoms and are at a higher risk of death. Some less charitable people think that's a good thing. I wonder if they'll think the same way when they are in their 80's.

An interesting side effect of the COVID regulations in Australia (masks, not-very-social distancing and a shut down of the economy) is that the flu is much less of a problem at present. A surprising number (3.9 per 100,000) of people die from flu. That meant 1,255 people in 2017 (ABS figures). So far, there have been 905 COVID deaths in 2020. The infection rate has dropped dramatically, and therefore so has the death rate.

Only facts and figures can persuade an objective person. Unfortunately, they are in short supply.

 

[mindlight]

The reason that COVID is more dangerous is that it is way more easily spread. Older people are likely to suffer more severe symptoms and are at a higher risk of death. Some less charitable people think that's a good thing. I wonder if they'll think the same way when they are in their 80's.

An interesting side effect of the COVID regulations in Australia (masks, not-very-social distancing and a shut down of the economy) is that the flu is much less of a problem at present. A surprising number (3.9 per 100,000) of people die from flu. That meant 1,255 people in 2017 (ABS figures). So far, there have been 905 COVID deaths in 2020. The infection rate has dropped dramatically, and therefore so has the death rate.

Only facts and figures can persuade an objective person. Unfortunately, they are in short supply.

Yes this guy would use your numbers to argue that since cv19 had a lower mortality rate (905 v 1255) it was less deadly. But the key number here is the IFR. How many people got infected with flu and then what % died. How many got infected with cv19 and then how many of those died. What was the observed R number for flu and for cv19. Australia is not the best example cause you managed to contain the outbreak far better than elsewhere.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Yes this guy would use your numbers to argue that since cv19 had a lower mortality rate (905 v 1255) it was less deadly. But the key number here is the IFR. How many people got infected with flu and then what % died. How many got infected with cv19 and then how many of those died. What was the observed R number for flu and for cv19. Australia is not the best example cause you managed to contain the outbreak far better than elsewhere.

Agree. It's at a high price, but I think it worth it.

 

[rocknanchor]

Someday, you will also have purchased numerics to figure in.

 

[klutedavid]

Having gotten into a debate on the weekend with an antimasker I became more aware of an argument doing the rounds about how covid19 is no more deadly than flu.

Reading up on this I found this article from national geographic which suggests covid19 is 50-100 times more deadly.

How scientists know COVID-19 is way deadlier than the flu

But the death rate seems to have declined considerably since this article was written, possibly due to a new awareness of asymptomatic infections due to extensive testing. My latest readings are that the Infection-Fatality rate for Flu is <0.1% and that of covid19 somewhere between 0.65% and 1.46%. This would make covid19 between 6 and 15 times more deadly. Add in a longer incubation time and higher natural Reproduction rate and the disease is clearly far more of a threat.

Does any body have any more recent research on this? How would you argue with someone who thought that the science did not support the view that covid19 was more deadly?

I don't think the flu hits people like Covid-19.

World Health Organization

What we know about people who feel they do not fully recover from COVID-19

COVID-19 can sometimes result in prolonged illness, even in young adults and children without underlying chronic medical conditions.

• There are many case reports from people who do not regain their previous health following COVID-19.

• Little is known about the clinical course of COVID-19 following milder illness.

• In a telephone survey of symptomatic adults who had a positive outpatient test result for SARS-CoV-2, 35% had not returned to their usual state of health when interviewed 2–3
weeks after testing.

• Among those 18 to 34 years in good health, 20% (1 in 5) reported that some symptoms were prolonged.

• Risk factors for persistence of symptoms: high blood pressure, obesity, mental health (Parkinsons).

(https://www.who.int/docs/default-so...omms-updates/update-36-long-term-symptoms.pdf)

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Given that testing stats are only partial and rather unreliable, the best measure of COVID-19 fatality rates is excess deaths compared with the 5-year average. This needs to be adjusted downwards to account for deaths resulting from reluctance or inability to access medical services for other serious conditions, but is balanced by the reduction in deaths from other infectious diseases (e.g. seasonal flu) due to social protection measures.

The first wave showed a large increase in excess deaths; the recent second wave death rate is much lower, partly because many of the most vulnerable succumbed in the first wave, there is greater awareness and protection among the vulnerable, and there have been significant improvements in survivability in hospital (dexamethasone reduces ICU deaths by up to 33%).

 

[Brightmoon]

This is from October 21, 2020 , America isn’t Australia . These are photos

 

[hedrick]

Right. Deaths are clearly lower now. I'd argue, however, that most people would consider being hospitalized a significant consequence in itself.

IHME is still talking about almost 400K deaths, though now it's by Feb. But that requires a daily death rate similar to the original peak, in January. Their death rate curve looks a lot like their infection curve. I wonder if they're assuming a death rate that hasn't changed.

A more conservative projection is probably 300K by Spring. That's a bit above 5 times a typical flu season. But as in the Spring, one issue is that it looks like it's about to cause hospitals to fill in parts of the mid-West. That's a problem in itself.

 

[Paulos23]

Given that we have areas in the country where the hospital capacity is at 99% due to COVID and they are shipping off cases to other cities that currently have low cases, it may be a matter of time before the death rate goes up.

And we are still at over 5,000 deaths per week in the county from a high of 7,000 per week, so I wouldn't say it is dropping off significantly.

 

[mindlight]

Given that testing stats are only partial and rather unreliable, the best measure of COVID-19 fatality rates is excess deaths compared with the 5-year average. This needs to be adjusted downwards to account for deaths resulting from reluctance or inability to access medical services for other serious conditions, but is balanced by the reduction in deaths from other infectious diseases (e.g. seasonal flu) due to social protection measures.

The first wave showed a large increase in excess deaths; the recent second wave death rate is much lower, partly because many of the most vulnerable succumbed in the first wave, there is greater awareness and protection among the vulnerable, and there have been significant improvements in survivability in hospital (dexamethasone reduces ICU deaths by up to 33%).

So it is possible that second wave IFR is now more in line with annual flu IFR? Is this only because of extra precautions compared to flu or because we now have treatments to reduce fatality risk which have eliminated difference.

 

[mindlight]

I don't think the flu hits people like Covid-19.

World Health Organization

What we know about people who feel they do not fully recover from COVID-19

COVID-19 can sometimes result in prolonged illness, even in young adults and children without underlying chronic medical conditions.

• There are many case reports from people who do not regain their previous health following COVID-19.

• Little is known about the clinical course of COVID-19 following milder illness.

• In a telephone survey of symptomatic adults who had a positive outpatient test result for SARS-CoV-2, 35% had not returned to their usual state of health when interviewed 2–3
weeks after testing.

• Among those 18 to 34 years in good health, 20% (1 in 5) reported that some symptoms were prolonged.

• Risk factors for persistence of symptoms: high blood pressure, obesity, mental health (Parkinsons).

(https://www.who.int/docs/default-so...omms-updates/update-36-long-term-symptoms.pdf)

Being ill for longer with more damaging effects is an area where cv19 looks worse than flu. But still seems most people simply recover

 

[mindlight]

This is from October 21, 2020 , America isn’t Australia . These are photos View attachment 287176View attachment 287177

Yes but infections != deaths. If most of these are young people who will quickly recover it means less

 

[mindlight]

Right. Deaths are clearly lower now. I'd argue, however, that most people would consider being hospitalized a significant consequence in itself.

IHME is still talking about almost 400K deaths, though now it's by Feb. But that requires a daily death rate similar to the original peak, in January. Their death rate curve looks a lot like their infection curve. I wonder if they're assuming a death rate that hasn't changed.

A more conservative projection is probably 300K by Spring. That's a bit above 5 times a typical flu season. But as in the Spring, one issue is that it looks like it's about to cause hospitals to fill in parts of the mid-West. That's a problem in itself.

Of course flu can be added to these covid numbers but cases may be reduced by social distancing. It seems people are not that afraid of flu

 

[mindlight]

Given that we have areas in the country where the hospital capacity is at 99% due to COVID and they are shipping off cases to other cities that currently have low cases, it may be a matter of time before the death rate goes up.

And we are still at over 5,000 deaths per week in the county from a high of 7,000 per week, so I wouldn't say it is dropping off significantly.

The disease has not mutated but we are seeing a lower death rate now

Explanations have included:

1) most vulnerable already dead
2) better anti virals
3) better protection of vulnerables
4) General mask wearing, cleanliness and social distancing

The IFR of a disease is effected by 2) , the rest merely reduce the risk but do not change underlying thŕeat levels

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

So it is possible that second wave IFR is now more in line with annual flu IFR? Is this only because of extra precautions compared to flu or because we now have treatments to reduce fatality risk which have eliminated difference.

It's possible, but it's too early to say - the data are not very good and there are so many interacting factors that it will be a while before there are any reliable conclusions - if ever...

 

[Paulos23]

The disease has not mutated but we are seeing a lower death rate now

Explanations have included:

1) most vulnerable already dead
2) better anti virals
3) better protection of vulnerables
4) General mask wearing, cleanliness and social distancing

The IFR of a disease is effected by 2) , the rest merely reduce the risk but do not change underlying thŕeat levels

What lower death rate, by what metric are you using? From where I am sitting it has dropped a little, but not enough to say it is way down. It is still way more dangerous and deadly than the flu.

Even if there were better anti-virals, that should work for the flu as well. And that is not something I am seeing either, not enough to say that COVID is less deadly than the flu. This is a nasty virus that we need to keep under control until the population is vaccinated.

 

[mindlight]

What lower death rate, by what metric are you using? From where I am sitting it has dropped a little, but not enough to say it is way down. It is still way more dangerous and deadly than the flu.

Even if there were better anti-virals, that should work for the flu as well. And that is not something I am seeing either, not enough to say that COVID is less deadly than the flu. This is a nasty virus that we need to keep under control until the population is vaccinated.

I might agree but where is data supporting view Cv19 IFR remains significantly higher than flu

Gross mortality numbers are not the key numbers here but rather what % people die having been infected.

 

[Paulos23]

I might agree but where is data supporting view Cv19 IFR remains significantly higher than flu

Gross mortality numbers are not the key numbers here but rather what % people die having been infected.

Here is a good article on that and shows why people are thinking that it is no deadlier than the flu.

Clarifying the True Fatality Rate of Covid-19: Same as the Flu?

The true fatality rate of Covid-19
To reiterate, Dr. Fauci said the Covid-19 mortality rate dropped from 2–3% to 1% after adjusting for asymptomatic infections. “The coronavirus mortality rate of 2–3% that was adjusted to 1% in Congressional testimony is consistent with the coronavirus CFR of 1.8–3.4% (median 2.6%) reported by the CDC,” Dr. Brown explained.

Thus, among those who became symptomatic, Covid-19 is not any deadlier than the flu. This had led to the notion that lockdowns were not necessary as Covid-19 is just like the seasonal flu.

“Furthermore, the WHO reported that the CFR of the H1N1 influenza virus is also 2–3%, similar to the unadjusted 2–3% CFR of the coronavirus reported in Congressional testimony, with no meaningful difference in mortality,” he added. “Evidence from the WHO confirmed that the approximate CFR of the coronavirus is generally no higher than that of seasonal influenza.”

As follows,

• Covid-19 has an IFR of 1% and CFR of 2–3%. More recent data by the CDC and WHO, however, estimates that Covid-19 has an IFR of 0.65% and 0.5-1%, respectively.
• The flu has an IFR of 0.1% or lower and CFR of 2–3%. (Please also see the update below about this.)

Thus, among those who became symptomatic (i.e., CFR), Covid-19 is not any deadlier than the flu. This had led to the notion that lockdowns were not necessary as Covid-19 is just like the seasonal flu.

Overall, a higher transmission rate leads to more infections and then more cases and, eventually, more deaths. Now, the CFR alone is not as important.

But such proponents seem to have been confused about the differences between CFR and IFR, as Dr. Fauci and others did. Among the total infection events (i.e., IFR), Covid-19 is still 6.5-times deadlier than the flu.

This means that a person is more likely to become a case (symptomatic) when infected with SARS-CoV-2 than with the influenza virus. The main reason is that SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus in which little preexisting immunity exists, so a lot more infected people will get sick.

Mostly, it looks like people are confusing the CFR with the IFR. The CFR is cases showing symptoms where IFR is based on the number of people infected. CRF for the two is similar, while the IFR shows that COVID is higher.

 

[Brightmoon]

Yes but infections != deaths. If most of these are young people who will quickly recover it means less

like Nick Cordero? Remember him and what Covid did to him before he died ?