back
4 comments
> When did we switch the emphasis from tracking deaths, to tracking infections?

Never, infections have always been a foucs of tracking because infections lead hospitalizations lead deaths (and hospitalizations have second-order impacts on mortality from other causes when they reach a critical level, even beyond direct COVID deaths.)

If you only focus on deaths, you are weeks behind the curve in reacting.

I noticed that too, at some point last summer.

I guess, death numbers weren't growing as expected.

It's a bit like climate warming temperature predictions.

I appreciate it's hard to do forecasts but the media doesn't help selling actual problems to the public by constantly twisting the narrative.

There's still a focus on deaths, but greatly increased testing capacity means that infection estimates are becoming more accurate.
Thank you.

From a non-medical, "just following the news" perspective, there was a pronounced shift. A few simple google news search will show this.

Back in April we weren’t able to test anyone outside of hospitals. In march we were likely up in the 100k infections a day just before lockdown, around what we are now come to think of it.

That’s based on taking the IFR and working backwards from reported deaths at different ages.

Not sure what you mean since tracking infections, hospitalizations, and deaths are all useful. However, there are reporting delays for infections and deaths during weekends and holidays.

Infections happen earlier than hospitalizations and deaths but the count depends on people getting tested.