[chrisk]

 
Second, if I were the Covid bean counting czar, I would try and impose some additional rigor on the death numbers.  As it is, I believe anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies, is considered a Covid death, irrespective of other, potentially overriding conditions.  There may not be a "better way," but I do think the current numbers include in the death totals some cases where reasonable people would disagree.  Undoubtedly a very small %, but still . . .

Rather than speculating, we can read how the CDC counts COVID deaths.  They don't perform the autopsies or sign the death certificates.  They base their numbers on what is in the death certificates.  Their guidance to the doctors or health officers responsible for filling those out can be found at
  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/coding-...orting.htm

Their guidance (your "some additional rigor") is

When COVID-19 is determined to be a cause of death, it is important that it be reported on the death certificate...

It is not anything like "anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies, is considered a Covid death".

In mid-May, the guidance was basically the same: "If COVID-19 is determined to be a cause of death, it should be reported on the death certificate."
In April, the Vital Statistics Reporting Guidance had "If COVID–19 played a role in the death, this condition should be  specified  on  the  death  certificate."

One of the things that bothers me is the lack or transparency on reporting. “Number of deaths” is not particularly telling.  Nor are guidelines that indicate “a” cause particularly helpful.  I have no idea if deaths are under or over reported. My guess is - both.  But I think having specific information of the deaths and hospitalizations. are important. Starting with age.  Then comorbidities. And not just generalities, specifics. What comorbidities. Gender.  Ethnicity/race.  Socioeconomic factors etc. A true in-depth analysis of whom this impacts the most and who is most at risk.  That way, perhaps we can start looking at more targeted approaches.

In addition to the variety of approaches taken in various US states, the US can look at 180+ countries to see what has worked and what hasn’t. Many Americans are not very committed to making personal sacrifices on behalf of the whole.

Some of the recent US studies, such as the one that identified restaurants as a possible venue for spreading, may help tailor the restrictions. However, the anti-mask attitude among many Americans hurts any plan in the US.

[chrisk]

 
Second, if I were the Covid bean counting czar, I would try and impose some additional rigor on the death numbers.  As it is, I believe anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies, is considered a Covid death, irrespective of other, potentially overriding conditions.  There may not be a "better way," but I do think the current numbers include in the death totals some cases where reasonable people would disagree.  Undoubtedly a very small %, but still . . .

Rather than speculating, we can read how the CDC counts COVID deaths.  They don't perform the autopsies or sign the death certificates.  They base their numbers on what is in the death certificates.  Their guidance to the doctors or health officers responsible for filling those out can be found at
  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/coding-...orting.htm

Their guidance (your "some additional rigor") is

When COVID-19 is determined to be a cause of death, it is important that it be reported on the death certificate...

It is not anything like "anyone who tests positive for the virus and dies, is considered a Covid death".

In mid-May, the guidance was basically the same: "If COVID-19 is determined to be a cause of death, it should be reported on the death certificate."
In April, the Vital Statistics Reporting Guidance had "If COVID–19 played a role in the death, this condition should be  specified  on  the  death  certificate."

One of the things that bothers me is the lack or transparency on reporting. “Number of deaths” is not particularly telling.  Nor are guidelines that indicate “a” cause particularly helpful.  I have no idea if deaths are under or over reported. My guess is - both.  But I think having specific information of the deaths and hospitalizations. are important. Starting with age.  Then comorbidities. And not just generalities, specifics. What comorbidities. Gender.  Ethnicity/race.  Socioeconomic factors etc. A true in-depth analysis of whom this impacts the most and who is most at risk.  That way, perhaps we can start looking at more targeted approaches.

In addition to the variety of approaches taken in various US states, the US can look at 180+ countries to see what has worked and what hasn’t. Many Americans are not very committed to making personal sacrifices on behalf of the whole.

Some of the recent US studies, such as the one that identified restaurants as a possible venue for spreading, may help tailor the restrictions. However, the anti-mask attitude among many Americans hurts any plan in the US.