This is a good example of sensational news about the brain hijacking my brain: nytimes.com/2020/06/26/opi
I read this piece and (out of concern) immediately forwarded it to a bunch of friends in the US. But then I realised: I needed to do the numbers! A thread about lessons learnt.
Conversation
The article says 'a third of hospitalised cases in Wuhan'. My brain glommed onto the 'THIRD' and glossed over the rest of the sentence. A third seems like a lot!
The article then goes on to describe all the horrible things to have happened to these people. God. Time to share!
1
Actually, there are two bits of data that I have to dig up, because the article reports:
1) a 3rd of all hospitalised cases in Wuhan
2) 85% of French ICU cases.
These numbers seem super high on their own! It was what got me to share indiscriminately! But: what's the context?
1
What is the % of hospitalisations in Wuhan?
And what is the % of ICU cases in France?
Wuhan's numbers are difficult to find, and the French numbers are also based on a model. But the goal here is not to get exact numbers, it is to get ballpark figures to use as an anchor.
1
Wuhan's numbers are underreported and bad. So I took a paper from The Lancet, which reports numbers for all of China; the % infected that are hospitalised looks to be between 1.1% and 18.4% depending on age. thelancet.com/journals/lanin
If we take 18.4%, a third of that is about 6%.
1
This stat article, on the other hand, reports 15% hospitalisation rate amongst those infected: statnews.com/2020/03/10/sim
If we assume 1/3 display neurological symptoms, that means 5%.
Ok so this is bad, but at least it's in context now. On to France.
1
This paper in Science reports 3.6% of infected are hospitalised, and of those 19% go to the ICU. So, if we accept that 85% of the ICU patients have neurological symptoms, that is around 0.006% with neurological symptoms.
Of course, the wrinkle is that age matters as well.
Replying to
The numbers here aren't accurate, but they give us an anchor. We have bounded this to 0.006%-6% of infected cases. This is bad, but it FEELS less bad than the original NYT article makes it out to be!
I was so alarmed by the NYT piece that I shared it to 7 different chat groups.
1
1
After pausing to do the math, I had to message all 7 groups with the numbers in context, and to apologise.
What did I learn? News pieces may report facts, and yet still make them seem a lot more scary than they actually are!
I don't know why I still bother reading news. Sigh.
3