Re: “Stanford researcher says coronavirus isn’t as fatal as we thought; critics say he’s missing the point” (Eastbaytimes.com, May 20):
Today, I read in the East Bay Times what will be for me the last article on any study that purportedly establishes the infectious fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19.
Every study is suspect at this point and there is no shortage of experts who will dispute other experts’ methodology and conclusions.
Mostly, I think any study that makes comparisons to the IFR for seasonal flu are ludicrous because they fundamentally assume the metrics for flu are accurate. I seriously doubt it, so we end up with suspect COVID-19 data measured against unreliable flu data.
Frankly, I think the media is doing its readers, listeners and viewers a tremendous disservice by reporting on such studies. They do nothing to help us understand anything other than clearly no one knows and that a lot of the research is probably more self-serving than accurate and useful.
Dan Weakley
San Ramon
Submit your letter to the editor via this form
Read more Letters to the Editor
