Posted on 05/19/2021 3:48:50 PM PDT by rxsid
Studies find California child hospitalizations from COVID-19 were 'grossly inflated' by at least 40% — findings 'likely' to be the same across US
The reported number of children hospitalized with COVID-19 in California was "grossly inflated," potentially leading policymakers and parents to believe kids were at higher risk from the virus than they actually are, according to two new studies.
"Hospital Pediatrics," a journal of medicine for pediatric care, published two research papers Wednesday that found child hospitalizations for COVID-19 were over-counted by at least 40% in the state, and researchers believe it's likely national numbers were similarly inflated. New York magazine reported commentary from Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, and her colleague Amy Beck, an associate professor of pediatrics, that explained the studies' findings.
"Taken together, these studies underscore the importance of clearly distinguishing between children hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 found on universal testing versus those hospitalized for COVID-19 disease," they wrote. The reported hospitalization rates "greatly overestimate the true burden of COVID-19 disease in children." In an interview, Gandhi told New York magazine "there is no reason to think these findings would be exclusive to California. This sort of retrospective chart review will likely reveal the same findings across the country."
New York magazine summarized the key findings from the two studies:
In one study, conducted at a children's hospital in Northern California, among the 117 pediatric SARS-CoV2-positive patients hospitalized between May 10, 2020, and February 10, 2021, the authors concluded that 53 of them (or 45 percent) "were unlikely to be caused by SARS-CoV-2." The reasons for hospital admission for these "unlikely" patients included surgeries, cancer treatment, a psychiatric episode, urologic issues, and various infections such as cellulitis, among other diagnoses. The study also found that 46 (or 39.3 percent) of patients coded as SARS-CoV2 positive were asymptomatic. In other words, despite patients' testing positive for the virus as part of the hospital's universal screening, COVID-19 symptoms were absent, therefore it was not the reason for the hospitalization. Any instance where the link between a positive SARS-CoV2 test and cause of admission was uncertain the authors erred toward giving a "likely" categorization.In the second study, at the fifth-largest children's hospital in the country, out of 146 records listing patients as positive for SARS-CoV-2 from May 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020, the authors classified 58 (40 percent) as having "incidental" diagnosis, meaning there was no documentation of COVID-19 symptoms prior to hospitalization. Like the first study, and as has been typical around the nation, this hospital implemented universal testing of inpatients for SARS-CoV-2. An example of incidentally SARS-CoV-2-positive patients are those who came to the hospital because of fractures. Patients who may have had COVID-19 symptoms but who had a clearly documented alternative reason for them, such as a child with abdominal pain and fever found to be related to an abdominal abscess, were also deemed to have incidental diagnosis. The study categorized 68 patients, or 47 percent, as "potentially symptomatic," which was defined as when "COVID-19 was not the primary reason for admission for these patients, and COVID-19 alone did not directly require hospitalization without the concomitant condition." Examples of these patients were those with acute appendicitis, since that condition includes gastrointestinal symptoms that may also present in COVID-19.
There are two important implications of these findings. The first is that policies that disproportionally affect children, like school closures or the cancellation of youth sports or summer camps, were implemented after reports greatly overstated the risk of children being hospitalized from COVID-19.
...
The second implication relates to the Food and Drug Administration's "emergency use authorization" for COVID-19 vaccines for children. If the studies' findings show that COVID-19 "poses a dramatically lower incidence of pediatric hospitalizations than the data have shown thus far," then the need for an emergency authorization of vaccines for kids to protect them from going to the hospital is perhaps less than previously thought.
...
Studies find California child hospitalizations from COVID-19 were 'grossly inflated' by at least 40% — findings 'likely' to be the same across US
You don’t say?
Well when you’re paying hospitals extra cash for COVID cases… what do you think they’ll find?
Not a surprise. The politicization of disease is almost as bad as the politicization of science. You get a urinary tract infection, go to the hospital, they do a blood test and find covid. If they didn’t test for it, the patient probably would have never known.
I repeat this one a bit on various threads: The Red Cross data shows that 20% of blood donated by unvaccinated people in March of 2021 showed covid antibodies. If that extrapolates out, it means over 70 million Americans or Residents of America have been infected. That is more than double the official number. So I deduce that many people had covid and never knew it, or, had covid and symptoms but before they could test for it.
It’s the old “For COVID” or “With COVID” question.
I assume that the Red Cross donators are not a representative sample. They give the blood. They can likely work at home and take other actions to protect themselves from infection.
I assume that the infection numbers are much higher and that a report on those that sell blood would show a higher percentage.
Assumptions, of course ...
The fearpornographers’ and maskerbators’ house of cards is collapsing.
And, postmortem, “OF COVID” or “WITH COVID”
Yes of course. That’s why I said if. It may in fact be higher, or lower, and the RC numbers may suffer from selection bias. But it’s still an interesting bit of data to throw into the mix. Honestly hadn’t thought of it the way you are thinking of it, e.g. that these numbers represent people who were more likely to have avoided the virus.
Texas recently reported a zero case day.
Yet Xiden is allowing (enabling) 1000’s of CCP virus cases into their state since he’s been “chosen”.
How in the world can you introduce all these people with this horribly infectious deadly disease into a state and no one gets infected?
When are people gonna start using their brains and realize this is one of the biggest hoaxes in history.
Follow the money...
By at least 40%.....AT LEAST. I bet it is a far cry higher than that if one knew the Gods truth.
uncle sugar pays on chinaflu
Must be the money. They should have to pay that back.
Government grants, rules, etc., are corrupting medicine, just as they have corrupted universities, scientific research and some of our major industries.
Or as Pogo put it...The enemy is us.
The wu-flu story and especially the vaccination shick has made me very cautious when dealing with the medical profession.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.