The Brazil Variant Is Exposing the World’s Vulnerability | Hacker News Reader

The Brazil Variant Is Exposing the World’s Vulnerability

theatlantic.com

"On the whole, Brazil has already reported the second-highest death toll in the world (though half that of the United States). As the country headed into summer, the worst was thought to be behind it."

Brazil has a Covid death rate 30% lower than the US (according to Worldometers). I'm very disappointed to see The Atlantic stoop to such misleading useage of numbers that are not corrected for population.

Things to consider when comparing the covid cases in brazil to other countries:

1. The government don't publish the number of covid deaths daily. The reported numbers are aggregate from a press consortium, and it is known to be underestimated;

2. Brazil has a public health system. Thus, people are treated for covid and pre-existing condition for free;

3. Houses are well ventilated. But in hot cities, like Manaus and Rio, recirculating air-conditioning are common in public places;

4. Mass public transportation is the norm for majority of population. Some have air conditioning, most don't;

5. Bolsonaro claims the federal government don't have autonomy to set public health guideline (despite the supreme court ruling the federal branch have "concurrent responsibility" with state branch).

6. Bolsonaro believes in heard immunity, preventive treatment with HQC and IVM and that lockdown kills more people than covid.

7. Hydroxicloroquine and Ivermectin are widely used as preventive treatment (I'm not making any consideration about efficacy, just letting you know);

8. The public health system is underfunded. Last month hospital in Manaus had a shortage of O2;

9. Three health secretary were fired/resigned since the start of the pandemic. The current one publicly said that he didn't know how the public health system works. Also, he is a veterinary from the army;

10. Multi generational family houses are common;

11. The entity that sets to health guidelines support the prescription of treatment without proven efficacy (such HQC and IVM).

Those are all excellent points, but are related to the accuracy of Brazil's reported figures, and not the manner in which The Atlantic chooses to report those numbers. Using raw death count is just misleading.

That’s not misleading. It’s simply stating values as a rough comparison.

Lichenstein has had only 52 Covid deaths, yet is 11th in the world for Covid deaths per capita. What possible value is there in comparing raw death numbers, without a reference to the population of the country in question?

Why was calling this “the Chinese virus” met with so much criticism, but saying “the $country variant” is fine?

The context in which "Chinese Virus" or "Kung Flu" (by the same person) was used is very telling for the message they're trying to send. The same person is also well known for other slurs. Additionally it was used at the time, to deflect blame for inaction.

I suspect that if a scientist had called it "The Chinese Virus" or "The Wuhan Virus" no one would have thought twice about it. They probably did too.

It was originally called Wuhan virus and then it was changed for PC reasons...

> It was originally called Wuhan virus

Was it? "called" In what way? In tabloid headlines maybe. But that was never a formal name for COVID-19, because formal disease names don't work that way. See "World Health Organization Best Practices for the Naming of New Human Infectious Diseases" (2015) Link above.

You can call that "PC reasons" if you like, but IMHO that's trivialising the use of existing agreed best practices, that exist for good reasons. As others here have pointed out, if a politician prefers to say "Wuhan virus" or "China Virus" over "COVID", then they are deliberately using a loaded term for xenophobic purposes.

Because at the start of the pandemic, when the virus was just starting to spread outside of China, the prase "the Chinese virus" negatively impacted people in other countries who "looked Chinese" (although in practice this was "looked East-Asian"). They were avoided, not allowed in certain places, harrased, "why are you bringing the virus here", etc.

Now is a different situation, the whole world is now a part of the pandemic. The phrase "the UK variant" or "the Brazil variant" is much less likely to negatively effect people.

It is interesting that Spanish Flu was first observed in the US, and could have been called the Kansas Flu, if it was not for wartime censorship.

The criticism is not "off the cuff", see the "World Health Organization Best Practices for the Naming of New Human Infectious Diseases" (2015)

PDF link: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/163636/WHO_...

> Disease names may NOT include: Geographic locations

> Examples to be avoided: Cities, countries, regions, continents

Why this is not applied to “the $country variant” is a very good question.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com