This board has been migrated to our new platform! Check out the new home page at discussion.fool.com or click below to go directly to the new Board on the new site.
There shouldn’t be a problem with a greater level of reporting, though.You need to have a given threshold of fever and specific symptoms to get counted....Yes, but in normal times, most people don’t go to the doctor just because they have a fever, unless they need a certificate for their employer. Yes, exactly as I noted in my post.These are two distinct factors which you've mixed up here.Concern #1: there may be a greater propensity to visit the doctor with any given level of illness.Concern #2: among those who visit, the worry that doctors are counting people as ILI who are not meeting the diagnostic criteria.Your post quoted above is in two parts:* my comment that [specifically] concern #2--changed reporting by the doctors--is not a problem with the numbers, quoted without context so the meaning is unclear* your comment that concern #1 is a statistical problem, which it is, exactly as I emphasized elsewhere in my post.The full quote was:"There shouldn't be a problem with a greater level of reporting, though.You need to have a given threshold of fever and specific symptoms to get counted.So, once somebody has decided to see one of the doctors who reports, the count should be accurate from there.Imaginary symptoms shouldn't be a material factor."This whole paragraph is asserting solely that concern #2 is probably not a material worry for the statistics.Apologies if that wasn't clear. To rephrase:From among patients we already know are getting examined by a reporting physician, the patient's reason for booking the visit is probably not an input to whether the doctor decides it's an ILI case.The statistical worries are among the processes prior to the start of the examination.Those include, among other things, concern #1: a different likelihood of seeking a doctor's visit due to knowledge of the Covid-19 epidemic.Which, as we both have noted, could be a big issue.Offhand it seems unlikely to be enough to cause anything like 23 million extra non-flu diagnoses, but I'm sure it happens.Jim
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
My Fool |