The mortality rate will be much higher the more overloaded we allow the hospitals to become. CDC's 'worst case' numbers are 1.7 million dead, but CDC is assumi

The mortality rate will be much higher the more overloaded we allow the hospitals to become. CDC's 'worst case' numbers are 1.7 million dead, but CDC is assuming a 1% CFR which is the rate we observe in places where hospitals are not overloaded. In Italy-- which has more somewhat more ICU beds per capita than the US does and is a about 1.5 weeks ahead of the bay area in progression-- the current CFR is 6.8% (which is likely an underestimate because exponential growth means that most people who are diagnosed haven't been infected long enough to have died yet) and the resolved CFR is 43% (which is likely an overestimate, in part because people are dying faster than they are recovering in Italy now because they're going untreated). [NOTE: CFR is not IFR, and the CDC analysis uses CFR and separately accounts for the fact that only a small portion of infections result in hospitalizations] The best way to mitigate economic effects is to act stronger earlier, exponential growth means that little improvements earlier are more impactful than vastly more aggressive measures later. After halting big public events, bars closures have probably some of the best ratios of reduced communicability to economic harm, especially given the data showing that young people are carriers are much higher rates than older populations. Many people's informal observations that even last night many bars were very busy. I keep hearing from younger people that if it were an issue 'they' would close down and so concern must be over-hyped. This perception makes it more important to take stronger measures.