Happy Saturday.
April 18. (Both of my iPhones told me this is correct. I do not believe they are lying to me. Or are they?)
One of the trade-offs of writing a "what I am reading" email is the limited and cursory analysis I can offer. This writing is, for the most part, an exercise in quantity over quality. In many ways, that is appropriate and reasonable. However, there are times I read things that bother me. Obvious logical flaws, bias, or overtly agenda-driven articles. I spent some time today analyzing one article (and the cited study) to demonstrate how fulfilling, exhausting, and time consuming it is to analyze media critically. My advice is to teach our children well (Go CSN!). One day this will all be their problem.
(Who has CSN earworms now?)
----
FT data (No change in the presentation)
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
Death vs. Cases in the US.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-covid-cases-deaths?country=USA
Let's start our Saturday by mentally tilling the media soil with a non-randomly selected article from the internet:
I found the following article (linked from the Drudge Report home page) in a politically-oriented magazine.
https://spectator.us/stanford-study-suggests-coronavirus-more-widespread-realized/
citing a non-peer reviewed study attempting to estimate the true prevalence of coronavirus exposure.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1
First, the study
The biggest problem the study had is how it recruited - self-selected population off Facebook in a large, wealthy county of California. The bias may have cut both ways - more likely to find people who thought they were ill. And, perhaps more likely to find people who then self-isolated (given the socioeconomic status of this county). Many other comments address other sources of bias in the comments section of the MedRxIV.org abstract page (at the bottom) for this article.
Now, the Spectator article.
The general thesis of the spectator article is: "[I]f SARS-Cov-2 is already endemic in the population there is nothing we can do to stop it but no great reason to try to stop it, either: it has already ripped its way through the population with only a small proportion showing any symptoms." In addition, the author states that the argument has been made before in this magazine.
The Spectator article's key message contains a twofer of logical fallacies: a Red Herring (diversion) and a Strawman (deliberate misstating of an opposing argument).
https://literarydevices.net/red-herring/
https://literarydevices.net/straw-man/
Have we wasted our time and expended resources unnecessarily?
We know testing is incomplete due to availability and sensitivity (false negative rates).
- It is not surprising that the number of exposed, asymptomatic, and/or minimally affected individuals is more significant than reported.
- Undoubtedly, a change in the denominator of asymptomatic patients would impact the % of the population infected, the rates of death, and the rates of hospitalization.
- That does not mean the virus is not super-contagious.
- This does not mean that the virus is not making people ill in serious ways, for prolonged periods, and killing many more than other diseases.
- It does not mean COVID is not creating a flood of hospitalized patients who are using enormous resources and denying resources to other people with other diseases.
- It does not mean that the societal disruption would be any less if we let this disease "run its course" and did not take measures to slow the spread.
Thus, the absence of an accurate denominator population of total infected should not lead one to conclude that the measures to stop the spread of the disease and minimize the impact on our healthcare system are unnecessary.
- Even if the true prevalence in the population is closer to 4% (as the study implies is possible), this number does not confer herd immunity.
- We would still be disproportionately impacting our healthcare workers, healthcare system, and vulnerable citizens (more so without quarantining and efforts to minimize spread. This is the premise of flattening the curve, right?).
This article is an excellent example of using a flawed study to attempt to support an a priori conclusion using logical fallacies. The politicization of the epidemic is not surprising. A healthy discussion of how long you pause an economy, the lesser of evils (lots of economic impact vs. lots of COVID illness and death), and how you support your citizens between now and then are all fair discussions. What I find disturbing is the hijacking of 1 or 2 medical articles as evidence to bolster a politically-biased conclusion (do not worry, it will all be OK if we ignore it). Conclusions looking for data are intellectually dishonest. They use data to create a false sense that there is a "hidden wave of inevitable truth," ignoring the flaws of the studies and often downplay the trade-offs of what they are supporting.
Other things that piqued my interest
We are 37-million years late for Netflix's Penguin King.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/giant-6-foot-8-penguin-discovered-in-antarctica
(The science of Jurassic Park, we need you now!)
I do not know how sensitive or specific the dogs-sniffing-disease thing is, but it is always interesting to me. I am aware of canine ability to pick up on Parkinson's, melanoma, and the near dead.
It would be pretty amazing if our best tool turns out to be a bunch of cocker spaniels. Ignore the source of the article, but enjoy the Match.com-like descriptions of the dogs
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/coronavirus-dogs-being-trained-diagnose-21885979
I have allergies and sneezed a lot. Like "carried a box of kleenex in middle school (sometimes)" allergies. [NB - this is not an attractive trait].
Sneezing has taken on a far more sinister feel since that time. National Geographics visualization of a sneeze article is disturbing. (sorry for the sign-up wall)
--------Bonus Round - Liberal Arts Infographics Saturday (all this critical thinking has me riled up for college!!)
Joseph Campbell was a literature professor who wrote about mythology and religion. He influenced George Lucas. His notions of "hero journeys" and archetypal stories that span cultures are well known.
Visualize this!
https://i.redd.it/s6kt7dyn3dt41.png
Watch it too!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F7Wwew8X4Y&feature=youtu.be
Background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell
Epicureanism is a Hellenistic philosophy that was most prevalent until the fall of Rome. It is worthy of numerous posts as it underlies much of the humanist thought revitalized by the enlightenment. The philosophy believes in an agnostic, logical, and observable universe. It argues that a life of sustainable, moderate pleasure is the "good life."
The arguments against the existence of gods and superstition made Epicureans very unpopular during some periods of history. Either way, I offer a well done graphical representation of the Epicurean Paradox on Omnipotent super-beings.
https://i.redd.it/8o4v93d735t41.jpg
background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism
Clean hands and sharp minds team
-AW
Comments
Post a Comment