Determining the Cause of Death: A Scientific Perspective

  • Thread starter Thread starter jack action
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cause Death
Click For Summary
An 85-year-old local politician died from COVID-19 complications after a rapid decline in a nursing home, exacerbated by pre-existing pulmonary conditions and a history of smoking. The discussion revolves around attributing his death to COVID-19, smoking, or simply old age, highlighting the complexity of causation in mortality. Many participants argue that underlying health issues significantly increase the risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19, while others question the fairness of attributing deaths solely to the virus without considering age and lifestyle factors. The conversation also touches on the legal implications of death certificates and the necessity of accurately recording causes of death for public health data. Ultimately, the debate underscores the challenges in categorizing causes of death, especially in elderly patients with multiple health issues.
  • #31
Cause of death is what this thread started with but it appears there is more to it based on the tone we are getting from @jack action .
-
@jack action to suggest folks that don't see your point of view would be in favor of letting granny burn up for the sake of holding Covid down is beyond absurd. Probability by definition implies there will be a certain amount of Covid transmission. So, in order to deal with things like Granny's burning apartment we compensate elsewhere by holding off on unnecessary activities. This isn't directly about cause of death but I don't think you ever intended this to be the case from the beginning.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Averagesupernova said:
Cause of death is what this thread started with but it appears there is more to it based on the tone we are getting from @jack action .
Yes, that was just an entry point into arguing that the restrictions are too stringent or shouldn't exist in favor of personal choice. It's a discussion we've had before in the "COVID containment efforts" thread. The basic premise that there's more complexity in the counts is valid, but it doesn't lead where he wants...
 
  • Like
Likes Averagesupernova and hutchphd
  • #33
jack action said:
There is an old local politician who died today. He was 85 years-old. He caught Covid in his nursing home, it rapidly escalated and he died of complications (in around 24h).

Here's the thing: he already had a pulmonary condition (the reporter did not specified). He was an avid smoker all of his life until he quit at 82 years-old.

Should his death be attributed to smoking or to Covid? Or maybe just simply of old age?
For the Flu they have been including all likely Flu related deaths in the numbers for estimated impact. This would include anybody that died and showed Flu like symptoms. They also reportedly include all pneumonia deaths as flu deaths (possibly with some post-hoc statistical adjustment) since most pneumonia deaths are caused by the flu.

Since we look to the flu as something to compare Covid-19 against in terms of impact, it would make sense to be consistent. However, I am not sure how one could apply the same estimation methods in a year with both Covid-19 and the flu, because now those deaths which would have been assumed to be related to the flu are more likely to have been related to covid-19. In that sense, maybe we would also be lumping in a lot of deaths which were actually caused by the flu into the Covid-19 estimation, but since flu deaths would be a small percentage of the numbers it wouldn't be too big of a deal. Presumably, just like the flu estimates, they will continue to make post-hoc statistical adjustments for many years to come. In the meantime, I think that if they followed the same methodology as for the flu, they would just count everything that seems likely, then subtract and add to the numbers by guessing how many they counted erroneously, and how many they missed later on as people publish new papers proposing better estimations. With the flu, the estimations seem to increase after post-hoc adjustment, and sometimes it takes years before they stop changing it.
 
  • Like
Likes Averagesupernova
  • #34
jack action said:
There is an old local politician who died today. He was 85 years-old. He caught Covid in his nursing home, it rapidly escalated and he died of complications (in around 24h).

Here's the thing: he already had a pulmonary condition (the reporter did not specified). He was an avid smoker all of his life until he quit at 82 years-old.
anything can kill at such an age
 
  • #35
russ_watters said:
I think you're reaching to add an extra step, or emphasizing one over another, when multiple can contribute.

See also:
Cause of death: Faulty brakes.
Cause of Death: Cheeseburgers. Lots of cheeseburgers.

For the purpose of measuring the disease, it needs to be recorded somewhere. And so do the comorbidities.
Though it would be hilarious if that was the report they give.
 
  • #36
White Hole said:
Though it would be hilarious if that was the report they give.
It's been an anti vax thing early doors and they are still wheeling it out.
There are about 160,000 death certs with COVID19 from March 2020 in the UK.
Official deaths are at 135000 due to Covid. We can assume Drs and pathologists can still do an ok job and the stat guys who look at 5 year averages year by year month by month make a contribution. I think that's why the UK reduced numbers by about 5000 last year and China added 3000.
 
  • #37
StevieTNZ said:
Isn't that for the Coroner to decide?
Until then, his cause of death is a superposition of COVID and long term smoking.

And as much of a trite joke that is, it is actually likely a combination of both.
 
  • #39
I am going to take a risk that this post will sound too political, but I can foresee a future where the cause of death will be xxxx and long term complications of covid.
 
  • #40
Averagesupernova said:
I am going to take a risk that this post will sound too political, but I can foresee a future where the cause of death will be xxxx and long term complications of covid.
Possibly true. In one study, 30% of college athletes who tested positive for Covid had heart damage.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...ign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=091120

One of the particularly insidious aspects of Covid is that you can have permanent heart, lung, vascular, or neurological damage, and not even know you had it.

One can even imagine that since we likely do not develop much long-term immunity to this, it could conceivably come back each year like other Corona viruses referred to as the common cold. But with this, each time you get it, it makes you more vulnerable the next time by doing lung and/or other organ or vascular damage. Eventually it degrades your health enough to kill you.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes Bystander
  • #41
Lot of opinions in this thread. I confess I did not read them all.

As I see it, one should ask the question: But for Covid-19, would this person be alive today? The answer is surely: probably.

That means it is classified as a Covid-related death. It does not have to be the cause of death to be counted as a Covid-related death.

Especially since, technically, no one has ever died of Covid-19 they have all died from complications arising due to Covid-19.
 
  • Like
Likes Ivan Seeking and pinball1970
  • #42
And not to put too fine a point on it, but 100% of all deaths are due to the same cause: lack of oxygen to the brain. All other factors (up to and including cardiac arrest - and even exsanguination) are merely contributory. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes Ivan Seeking and Bystander

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
496
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
30K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
853
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K