The removal of the suspected cases in Africa is interesting. My interpretation of this change is that it provides cover for certain demographic groups to keep all of the vaccine doses in Western countries. If the risk profiles look the same everywhere then there is no longer the pressure to send limited vaccine supplies there. Stability …
The removal of the suspected cases in Africa is interesting. My interpretation of this change is that it provides cover for certain demographic groups to keep all of the vaccine doses in Western countries. If the risk profiles look the same everywhere then there is no longer the pressure to send limited vaccine supplies there. Stability of reporting practices is so important when assessing time series. It becomes very difficult to properly assess risk in the absence of it. National and world agencies have done their best job during the past couple years to obscure data.
I agree. An illness with visual symptoms occurring in a region in which it is endemic may not even need testing supplies. Those suspected cases were most likely real cases.
The removal of the suspected cases in Africa is interesting. My interpretation of this change is that it provides cover for certain demographic groups to keep all of the vaccine doses in Western countries. If the risk profiles look the same everywhere then there is no longer the pressure to send limited vaccine supplies there. Stability of reporting practices is so important when assessing time series. It becomes very difficult to properly assess risk in the absence of it. National and world agencies have done their best job during the past couple years to obscure data.
The perverse irony of the "suspected" cases in Africa is the reason they are suspected is a lack of test kits for confirmation.
So instead of sourcing the test kits the WHO just buried the cases.
I agree. An illness with visual symptoms occurring in a region in which it is endemic may not even need testing supplies. Those suspected cases were most likely real cases.
Exactly.