4 ms·
Yes, it seems deaths are the most reliable indicator we have (though even this is limited [0]). Looking at highly sampled cases (SK and Diamond Princess) seems
by mNovak 7y ago
Yes, it seems deaths are the most reliable indicator we have (though even this is limited [0]). Looking at highly sampled cases (SK and Diamond Princess) seems to indicate a net fatality rate of 1%.
Thinking about the cohort of infections eventually leading to those deaths, though, means we're really getting a snapshot of the number of infections some 19 days ago (5 days incubation, 14 days from symptom to death [1]). With a conservative 6 day doubling period, and assuming still in growth phase, cumulative infections today is roughly 900x cumulative deaths today.
So ballpark for the US (217 deaths) is about 195k current infections.
Spain (831 deaths): 748k infections
Italy (3405 deaths): 3M infections
[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-homes-insigh/uncounted-among-coronavirus-victims-deaths-sweep-through-italys-nursing-homes-idUSKBN2152V0 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-...
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/#days https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-...
- vanniv 7y agoYour source is yet another avenue for deaths to occur without being counted. My flu and pneumonia data came from https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html Check out the disclaimer on that page, too (even routine things like flu and pneumonia, that happen every year, the statistics are really bad until a few years later when all the adjustments are made) One interview I saw from a CDC modeller last week was using 5-day doubling, 15-day median time to death, and 1% CFR to estimate, and was saying thus that current cases ~= 800x current deaths. So, yeah, it's clearly more widespread than reported, and clearly all numbers everywhere are totally wrong (including yours and mine)