Covid-19 Deaths in moscow

Opinion | Covid-19 Deaths in Moscow: The Government’s Account

The Moscow authorities published about Covid-19 Deaths deaths in April mortality statistics in early May. Some news organizations compared monthly figures and assumed that the increase reflected the number of Covid-19 deaths. But the figures alone do not disclose the cause of death and vary widely in any event.

In April 2020, the city recorded 11,846 deaths. While that number was an increase of 1,841 over April 2019, it was an increase of only 985 for the same month in 2018. Our research showed that 639 of the deaths in April 2020 were attributable to Covid-19.

We perform an autopsy in every case, and therefore we are confident in the accuracy of our data. An increase in mortality rates is natural with an increase of acute respiratory viral infections, which aggravate the underlying illnesses.

Other countries show similar statistics, with the death rate from Covid-19 being lower than the overall increase in the death rate.

But even if all the additional deaths for April in Moscow were attributed to the coronavirus, Moscow’s death rate for Covid-19 would be lower than the rates in New York and London.

Moscow is ready and willing to discuss its experience with both Russian and foreign experts.

Alexey Khripun
Moscow
The writer is head of the Moscow Healthcare Department.

To the Editor:

For the last several months, The New York Times has done a really fine job covering the coronavirus. The daily data on infections, new cases, testing and deaths has been especially informative, as has the constantly updated U.S. map showing the spread of the virus.

The graphics and visualizations show the terrible growth of this virus and make it startlingly clear what could happen if we botch the long-term response.

The data also makes clear that while the curve of new cases and deaths may be flattening, there are many states where they’re still on the rise. Science and data — not politics — should dictate when and how states begin to reopen.

Rushing back to “normal” will risk more lives being lost and even more painful economic hardship. Now more than ever we need reliable data and trustworthy reporting to guide decision-making. I commend The New York Times and other outlets that have done such an exceptional job under difficult circumstances. Please keep this up!

Dianne Feinstein
Washington
The writer is a Democratic U.S. senator from California.

I held a ticket for a June 3 flight on a legacy carrier from Boston to Rome that was canceled. The airline couldn’t be bothered to tell me, even though it has my email and mobile phone number; I found out accidentally, by going online to monitor my flight. (Good move.)

Fortunately its website makes it easy to get a refund — until you discover that its idea of a “refund” is nothing more than a travel voucher. If you want to get an actual refund, you need to call the airline and wait (in my case) 47 minutes for a human.

There is nothing illegal about that, but it could easily just have refunded the money to the credit card, as thousands of e-retailers do every day.

Bail out the airlines? Maybe — but let’s make sure it includes as much friction as they give their customers. They should have to wait. On the phone. A long time. And listen to bad music and phony corporate-speak about how we “value” them.

They should have to pay extra to choose their place in line with the other bailout supplicants.

Then, when we decide to cancel the offer, they’ll need to go online and figure it out themselves.

And get a voucher for a future bailout.

Max Alexander
Thomaston, Me.

Source link