(The global death rate was continuing its overall decline - with negative annual increases since 1950.) In the decade up to 2018, China’s crude death rate was increasing slowly, reflecting an aging population. Smoking Gun #2: The Deaths That Are NOT MissingĬhina does report the crude death rate for the entire population (available from sources such as the World Bank and the United Nations). It is clear that the data is being suppressed. In short, Beijing’s official 0.0% case fatality rate despite tens of thousands of Covid cases in the last 20 months is a medical impossibility. Here’s the key point: China’s Zero-Covid policy may contain the spread of the disease – but it would have no effect on the mortality rate of individuals who do become infected. This is beyond “implausible.” Most of the 22,000+ cases officially reported in mainland China after April 2020 occurred prior to the introduction of vaccines or treatment. rate is 1.3%.)Īfter April 2020, official Covid mortality figures in mainland China dropped to zero. Note that Hong Kong, which also follows very strict containment protocols, shows a CFR of 1.6% – very close to the world average of 1.8%. Prior to April 2020, Covid was raging in Wuhan/Hubei (according to official statistics) - with an unusually high case fatality rate (CFR) of 5.7% – 3 times higher than the CFR for the rest of the world. No Covid Deaths Reported After April 2020 Chart by author Of all the “gaps” in the official data coming out of China, the most damning is the complete cessation of all reported Covid mortality in Mainland China after April 2020 – despite the continuing spread of the infection, despite tens of thousands of reported cases of Covid infection. There are at least two “smoking guns” sitting in plain sight, based on the official figures published by Beijing – unexplained discrepancies which point directly to the apparent manipulation, suppression, and even falsification of the data relating to Covid mortality in China. That leads us to a more serious problem with the data. Perhaps, say China’s defenders, it shows that Beijing’s extreme policies actually do work better than merely very strict ones. Still, it is true (as some readers responding to the previous columns have argued) that no country has gone quite as far as China has, locking down cities, banning all travel, welding people shut into their houses, setting up mass quarantine camps, jailing workers for failing to wear masks (e.g.), etc… One might wonder how China can claim a Covid mortality rate 30 times lower than Korea’s, 50 times lower than Singapore’s? Or 73 times lower than New Zealand’s (since April 2020)? These are countries with strict containment policies, highly secure borders, strong public health infrastructure, and high vaccination rates.Ĭovid Deaths per 100,000 – Asia Developed Countries vs China Chart by author Some of the official data that Chinese authorities do choose to make available is very strange. China’s data-embargo has compromised the inquiry into the origins and evolution of the pandemic, and it is now obstructing our understanding of the effectiveness of alternative countermeasures. Lack of cooperation is not necessarily incriminating, but it is very problematic. The Economist’s study comes with a caveat: “The Chinese Centres for Disease Control did not respond to our requests.”
Incompleteness of Chinese Data Chart by authorĬhina in fact systematically refuses to cooperate with almost all requests for Covid-related data from international organizations and scientific researchers (many examples noted in my previous column).
Scientific studies of Covid mortality are forced to leave China out of consideration. For example, China does not report any figures for excess mortality, which is a standard metric that the United Nations calls the “preferred measure” for assessing the impact of the disease on a given population. Information from China on Covid-related matters is often simply unavailable. And some of what is reported cannot possibly be true. Nevertheless, to avoid these concerns about ML interpretability, in this column I will focus on conclusions that can be based strictly on the data officially reported by the Chinese government.Įven sticking with this uncontested source, however, obvious problems emerge. I believe The Economist’s model is sound, as far as it goes, and if the authorities in Beijing were to make data available from China, the results could be improved. Critics (especially in China) have seized on this point to reject any and all “interpolated” data, and any hypotheses or conclusions based on such.Īt my university we have experience with ML and related techniques. They can also produce results which may be hard to interpret or explain. ML techniques can be very useful in detecting hidden patterns.
0 kommentar(er)
