Analysis of COVID-19 Mortality Rates

Introduction

Thomas Harrington, author of "The Treason of the Experts: Covid and the Credentialed Class," has shared his thoughts on the COVID-19 pandemic. Although he is not an epidemiologist or medical expert, Harrington has spent considerable time studying how information dissemination impacts public policy. His aim is to highlight some overlooked aspects in the government and media's portrayal of the COVID-19 crisis.

COVID-19 Mortality Statistics

El País, a newspaper in Madrid, recently published an article titled "Young, Healthy and in the ICU: the Risk is There." The article shares the story of a healthy 37-year-old Spanish policeman who died from COVID-19 and cites data from The Lancet, a British medical journal, on COVID-19 mortality patterns in Italy. The data shows that the median age of the deceased is 81, and most had pre-existing conditions such as diabetes or cardiovascular diseases. Deaths among people under 50 are rare, and there are no known deaths of anyone under 30.

The Italian Institute of Health provided a chart showing the chances of death from COVID-19 for each ten-year age group from 0 to 100. The data shows that the risk of death is minimal for people under 60, but increases significantly for those over 60.

Interpreting the Data

Based on this data, Harrington suggests that the El País article's headline and story about the young policeman could be considered journalistic malpractice, as they imply that young, healthy people are at significant risk of dying from COVID-19, which the data does not support. He also concludes that infection does not present a serious health risk to most people under 60, assuming their infection rates are at least as high as older groups. He suggests that the best approach may be to focus efforts on isolating and treating people aged 60 to 100, while also providing care for the relatively few under 60 who become seriously ill.

Questioning Current Strategies

However, Harrington acknowledges that he does not have information on the number of hospital spaces required to keep under-60 mortality rates low. If a high number of hospital spaces are needed for these patients, it could negate his previous points. He questions why efforts to combat the virus are aimed at curbing its spread in the general population, rather than focusing on those most at risk. He also questions the wisdom of halting society, with its associated long-term economic and social consequences, when most of the working population could continue their activities without a significant risk of mortality.

Media Influence and Public Policy

Harrington also critiques the use of gross numbers of infections and reports of young, middle-aged athletes and celebrities who have tested positive for the virus as a way to justify society-wide policies. He argues that these tactics, along with the use of emotionally evocative images and simple personal storylines, are used to manipulate public perception and inhibit critical analysis of complex issues and potential long-term solutions.

Policy Making and Rational Considerations

Harrington suggests that fear of something bad happening to a small group of people should not dictate national policy. He points out that governments and large industries routinely calculate the acceptable loss or shortening of human life to achieve larger societal goals. He finds it curious that these rational considerations seem to be suspended in the face of the COVID-19 crisis.

Bottom Line

Harrington believes that the best course of action would be to focus efforts on those most likely to suffer and die from COVID-19, while allowing those who are largely free of this danger to continue to maintain societal functions. This analysis raises important questions about the strategies being used to combat COVID-19 and the role of the media in shaping public perception and policy. What are your thoughts on this perspective? Share this article with your friends and sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is delivered every day at 6pm.