|
|
|
|
|
by DennisP
2280 days ago
|
|
We have plenty of flu tests. Covid-19 is also pretty distinctive on chest CT scans, if it's advanced enough to kill you. The numbers may be wrong in that article but the math itself seems straightforward. It's certainly true that we need more tests to be sure of the numbers. Here's a pretty interesting simulation from a research group at the University of Basel: https://neherlab.org/covid19/ |
|
I guess you're suggesting that when people die of Covid-19, we'd know it and count it?
That's not true.
First, CT scans (and other expensive tests) are not generally performed on people who have died of pneumonia, apparently due to the flu (or other causes). Second, the radiologists reading those studies would have to train to make the distinction.
Now, going forward, we have an increasing need to know whether the virus that caused the pneumonia that killed the patient was Covid-19 or not, so maybe such testing will become routine. (I doubt it will be CT scans though, because there will be much cheaper and reliable ways to do it.)
But so far we've been undercounting Covid-19 deaths for the same reason we've been undercounting cases: lack of testing.