Dengue: la llamativa diferencia entre la cifra de muertes que informa el Gobierno y la real
The article reveals a significant divergence between official national data and provincial reports on the dengue epidemic, highlighting that the actual mortality rate is considerably higher than what has been published. This discrepancy, along with the underestimation of severe cases and the intentional omission of fatal victims in official communications, suggests a lack of transparency that undermines public understanding of the outbreak’s severity. The lack of visibility hinders the social mobilization needed to control the vector and obstructs evidence-based decision-making. Furthermore, the state’s inability to implement effective preventive measures, such as distributing approved vaccines that are currently out of stock, is criticized, leaving the population vulnerable to the progression of the disease. This political inaction contrasts sharply with the health urgency, as the circulation of multiple serotypes increases the risk of severe outcomes in reinfections—a critical risk factor that national reports appear to ignore or downplay. This situation is relevant to the field of open data because it illustrates how opacity, fragmentation, or poor quality in the publication of public information can have direct and lethal consequences. Transparency in health data is not merely an administrative issue but a social determinant of health; when data are not accessible, accurate, and comparable, public trust is eroded and a coordinated, effective response to epidemiological crises is impeded.
Source: clarin.comPublished on 2023-04-10