Why Does the Pandemic Seem to Be Hitting Some Countries Harder Than Others?(newyorker.com)
newyorker.com
Why Does the Pandemic Seem to Be Hitting Some Countries Harder Than Others?
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/03/01/why-does-the-pandemic-seem-to-be-hitting-some-countries-harder-than-others
43 comments
Also worth noting the extreme correlation of preexisting obesity epidemics and negative covid health outcomes.
Obesity makes you 3 times more likely to be hospitalized for covid.
When looking at the world map of obesity right next to the world map of covid mortality, the correlation/causation is startling.
America and Europe have the most obese people and the worst covid health outcomes, Africa and Asia have the least obese people, and the best covid outcomes.
Obesity makes you 3 times more likely to be hospitalized for covid.
When looking at the world map of obesity right next to the world map of covid mortality, the correlation/causation is startling.
America and Europe have the most obese people and the worst covid health outcomes, Africa and Asia have the least obese people, and the best covid outcomes.
Vitamin D plays a role as well, I believe (or at least weather conditions, as demonstrated by the extreme seasonality of the pandemic).
>Checked the latest literature and cross-reactive antibodies have not demonstrated correlation with either preventing infection or hospitalization. [0] [1]
The sample size of this study was only 251 people, apparently all from France, according to a comment on the study, though I could not confirm or deny that fact from searching through the source text.
In order to rule out cross reactivity, we'd need a much larger study comparing samples across many regions.
The sample size of this study was only 251 people, apparently all from France, according to a comment on the study, though I could not confirm or deny that fact from searching through the source text.
In order to rule out cross reactivity, we'd need a much larger study comparing samples across many regions.
And different populations have different endemic coronaviruses circulating in them.
In this age of widespread global travel, is that true anymore?
In this age of widespread global travel, is that true anymore?
This hypoethis is discussed in some depth in the article (search for "T cells").
TL;DR: Maybe. There is some evidence showing a link and other showing no link. Some lab studies show T cells get a response., but other studies show no statistical link.
TL;DR: Maybe. There is some evidence showing a link and other showing no link. Some lab studies show T cells get a response., but other studies show no statistical link.
An entire article pondering regional differences in COVID-19 mortality and severity without saying anything about differing demographics of (a) aging and its comorbidities and (b) obesity and its comorbidities.
SARS-CoV-2 is severe in old people and obese people, and very few outside that demographic. Wealthy nations have a much higher obesity rate than poorer nations. The US has ten times the number of obese individuals than India, three times as many as Nigeria. Wealthy nations have a larger proportion of the population in older age cohorts. The US has five times as many 65+ people as Nigeria.
I have no idea why the media persistently chooses to avoid these points. The research community has been turning out review papers by the score to point out, very bluntly, that COVID-19 mortality falls near entirely on the old and the obese.
SARS-CoV-2 is severe in old people and obese people, and very few outside that demographic. Wealthy nations have a much higher obesity rate than poorer nations. The US has ten times the number of obese individuals than India, three times as many as Nigeria. Wealthy nations have a larger proportion of the population in older age cohorts. The US has five times as many 65+ people as Nigeria.
I have no idea why the media persistently chooses to avoid these points. The research community has been turning out review papers by the score to point out, very bluntly, that COVID-19 mortality falls near entirely on the old and the obese.
A direct quote from the article that addresses that point:
When his researchers analyzed the data by age, location, and gender, they found that excess deaths tended to be observed in younger cohorts, and in rural rather than in urban settings; nor was there evidence of the usual coronavirus skew toward greater lethality in men
When his researchers analyzed the data by age, location, and gender, they found that excess deaths tended to be observed in younger cohorts, and in rural rather than in urban settings; nor was there evidence of the usual coronavirus skew toward greater lethality in men
Because media is in a business of building narrative, not reporting on facts.
- China: lock the fuck down
- The West: this is anti human!
- China: the pandemic is gone
- The West: they must be hiding the real numbers
- The West: we should lockdown
- The West: we should not lockdown
- The West: we should lockdown
- The West: China Virus!
- The West: we should not lockdown
- The West: we should lockdown
- The West: we should not lockdown
- The West: China Virus!
...
- The West: why can't we control the pandemic
I hate to say this but after reading the whole article I feel I like I wasted my time. The article is way too long and reads more like a novel than an informative piece. Unfortunately, the article does not contain any new or interesting revelations or insights, nor does it go into more depth on individual aspects that its title might promise.
Its conclusion can probably summarized as "We don't really know yet, probably population, health standards and living conditions, government policy and communication, maybe T-Cells, definitely poor data".
Its conclusion can probably summarized as "We don't really know yet, probably population, health standards and living conditions, government policy and communication, maybe T-Cells, definitely poor data".
I am really sorry but I think it is almost factually incorrect to say that the article does not contain new insights. Unfortunately I also cannot parse your sentence that "does it go into more depth on individual aspects that its title might promise" in a way that rhymes with what I just read - maybe you can elaborate?
The article is about the ways scientists are attacking an intriguing scientific question with enormous societal importance. It certainly does not have the answer to the question in the title, and if you kept reading while expecting one then maybe you missed the phrase "the greatest conundrum of the pandemic" in the introduction?
Altogether your comment, and the support it gets here, make me despair a bit for the popularization of science in general. Is such a well-written report on the scientific process itself dismissed so easily? Do we really only care about the answers?
The article is about the ways scientists are attacking an intriguing scientific question with enormous societal importance. It certainly does not have the answer to the question in the title, and if you kept reading while expecting one then maybe you missed the phrase "the greatest conundrum of the pandemic" in the introduction?
Altogether your comment, and the support it gets here, make me despair a bit for the popularization of science in general. Is such a well-written report on the scientific process itself dismissed so easily? Do we really only care about the answers?
> the article does not contain any new or interesting revelations or insights,
I don't know what exactly you mean by "new", but remember it's not published in a scientific journal. It isn't supposed to contain anything fully original.
For us common folk- I think there were lots of new & interesting stuff there.
I don't know what exactly you mean by "new", but remember it's not published in a scientific journal. It isn't supposed to contain anything fully original.
For us common folk- I think there were lots of new & interesting stuff there.
One takeaway for me was the possible importance of how prevalent is the congregate senior living in rich countries. Although it seems to me the most probable is still plain old gaps in testing and reporting.
It’s a story that doesn’t go anywhere. I like the New Yorker but this writing isn’t up to their usual standards IMO.
> The article is way too long and reads more like a novel than an informative piece
That is what is expected from the New Yorker
That is what is expected from the New Yorker
I know that's the New Yorker's style, it's just not my cup of tee. My comment is completely subjective and my personal opinion, I only read it because I thought the title was interesting and I expected the question to be addressed with some new insights.
I read your comment first and then checked if the submission was from the NewYorker.com domain ...
etretr(4)
Would be interesting to see covid deaths per country in relationship to how many carry risk factors (age, obecity, etc.) in each country.
And don't forget that countries have different ways to count COVID deaths. In the UK it's everyone who dies of any cause within 28 days of a positive test. Some other countries only consider COVID deaths if the patients had pneumonia.
And depending on the testing (availability, sensitivity) the death counts could be underestimated as well.
It will be an interesting challenge to get compatible statistics from different countries.
And depending on the testing (availability, sensitivity) the death counts could be underestimated as well.
It will be an interesting challenge to get compatible statistics from different countries.
> In the UK it's everyone who dies of any cause within 28 days of a positive test
But not everyone who has 'coronavirus' on the death certificate... Just to be clear here, if excess death rates are to be believed, it's likely that the UK is under reporting deaths.
PS: The "any cause" thing is also untrue, as far as I can see. Apparently, 88% of COVID patients who die do so within 28 days, so you can sort of guess at the undercounting going on here.
But not everyone who has 'coronavirus' on the death certificate... Just to be clear here, if excess death rates are to be believed, it's likely that the UK is under reporting deaths.
PS: The "any cause" thing is also untrue, as far as I can see. Apparently, 88% of COVID patients who die do so within 28 days, so you can sort of guess at the undercounting going on here.
I would also check if there is a correlation with mask usage, like you grab pictures from public places and count the mask wearing percentage, you could maybe(I could be wrong) the level of solidarity/cooperation (or insert your preferred term here ) and see if this variable correlates at all.
Absolutely, I think that would help policymakers get a better grasp of what measures help best in reducing the scope of these outbreaks.
It is well understood that age, hypertension (stress?) and obesity are major driving factors of covid-19 hospitalizations [0]. I would love to see governments spending as much money/resources on stimulating a healthy lifestyle as the do on vaccines and lockdowns.
[0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
It is well understood that age, hypertension (stress?) and obesity are major driving factors of covid-19 hospitalizations [0]. I would love to see governments spending as much money/resources on stimulating a healthy lifestyle as the do on vaccines and lockdowns.
[0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm
It's got to be something demographic / socio economic.
The fact that the one place in Africa that got hit hard also happens to be the most industrialized/westernized place can't be a coincidence.
That leaves a lot of options though. Diet? Obesity? Social habits? Ability to travel internationally? Pollution of some sort? Plastics? Could be anything
The fact that the one place in Africa that got hit hard also happens to be the most industrialized/westernized place can't be a coincidence.
That leaves a lot of options though. Diet? Obesity? Social habits? Ability to travel internationally? Pollution of some sort? Plastics? Could be anything
Last year I read a theory that there was correlation between antibiotics in food and the death rate, the hardest hit areas of Italy and Spain make lots of preserved meats using a lot of antibiotics, meaning there's more of antibiotic-resistant bacterias (if their diet has a lot of antibiotics, it would follow that they're evolving the toughest bacterias), and that the super-bacterial (secondary) infection kill the people who've been weakened by the viruses.
In Norwegian: https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/awEP27/derfor-...
Without actually knowing the situation on the ground, I'd say there's less antibiotics in food production in India/there's more bacteria going around that Indian immune systems are better prepared to fight the bacterias or antibiotics work better to kill them.
But well, it's another theory...
In Norwegian: https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/awEP27/derfor-...
Without actually knowing the situation on the ground, I'd say there's less antibiotics in food production in India/there's more bacteria going around that Indian immune systems are better prepared to fight the bacterias or antibiotics work better to kill them.
But well, it's another theory...
Occam's Razor, the data is bad, and bad in different ways between countries.
They tackle that explicitly on multiple levels. “Probably not” is the best tl;dr.
We must have read different articles.
Quoting...
>With respect to the raw numbers, underreporting is an enormous problem; differences in age distribution, too, make a very deep cut, and perhaps the models must further calibrate their weightings here.
They go on with the complex speculation about other causes, but obviously bad data is a huge driver of this anamoly. Bad data we can be sure of, the rest is speculative narrative.
>With respect to the raw numbers, underreporting is an enormous problem; differences in age distribution, too, make a very deep cut, and perhaps the models must further calibrate their weightings here.
They go on with the complex speculation about other causes, but obviously bad data is a huge driver of this anamoly. Bad data we can be sure of, the rest is speculative narrative.
The implication of your first comment was that the answer is straightforward.
The article makes a strong case that bad data only closes the gap partially.
The article makes a strong case that bad data only closes the gap partially.
Pathogenic priming, immune "enhancement" brought about by too many flu vaccinations?
I'm surprised this article doesn't discuss obesity, as it's clearly correlated with worse COVID-19 outcomes [1]. America's high obesity rate (>40%) seems like a pretty plausible cause for increased deaths and hospitalizations from the pandemic.
[1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....
[1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA....
The bit I found most interesting:
They found that the total number of “all cause” deaths reported between May and August almost doubled in India compared with the same period in each of the past five years.
“Is that because the number of covid deaths in the country has been vastly underestimated?” I asked.
“It’s impossible to have a decisive answer,” Shah told me. “But the pattern of the excess deaths doesn’t really shout out covid as the cause. It just doesn’t... The telltale signatures of covid just aren’t there,” he said. He won’t venture any hypotheses about the cause of the excess deaths. But among the possible candidates are indirect consequences of the pandemic: wage loss, displacement, malnourishment, forced migration, and disruptions in health care...
They found that the total number of “all cause” deaths reported between May and August almost doubled in India compared with the same period in each of the past five years.
“Is that because the number of covid deaths in the country has been vastly underestimated?” I asked.
“It’s impossible to have a decisive answer,” Shah told me. “But the pattern of the excess deaths doesn’t really shout out covid as the cause. It just doesn’t... The telltale signatures of covid just aren’t there,” he said. He won’t venture any hypotheses about the cause of the excess deaths. But among the possible candidates are indirect consequences of the pandemic: wage loss, displacement, malnourishment, forced migration, and disruptions in health care...
don't tell the NY Times. They are eager to attribute any and all excess deaths to COVID. Otherwise, their strong support of the lockdowns would have no reasonable basis.
Poor countries don’t have half of their country suffering from obesity.
I have noticed differing levels of mask compliance between population groups.
[deleted]
(Edit: Please ignore below.
Checked the latest literature and cross-reactive antibodies have not demonstrated correlation with either preventing infection or hospitalization. [0] [1]
[0] https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/02/10/do... [1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.06.20227215v... (pending publishing in Cell, but linked ArXiv for availability) )
Because pre-existing coronavirus antibodies have been proven cross-reactive to SARS-CoV-2.
And different populations have different endemic coronaviruses circulating in them.
This isn't some great mystery. This is a normal Tuesday for how human immune systems are supposed to work, as a species.