44 ms·

> actual fatality rate is likely on the order of 0.1% This is ludicrously optimistic. The virus has already killed over 0.1% of the entire population of New Yo

> actual fatality rate is likely on the order of 0.1% This is ludicrously optimistic. The virus has already killed over 0.1% of the entire population of New York City, and it's barely starting to wind down (i.e. will probably hit 0.2%). It's also approaching 0.1% of the entire populations of several of the hardest hit areas across the US (Bergen County, NJ; Chelsea, MA; Orleans Parish, NJ), with the most optimistic antibody and random sampling studies suggesting no more than one-third of the total populations infected at this point. Some of the most reasonably optimistic numbers that are being bandied about nowadays are three to four times higher than that (0.3-0.4%), though I think the majority of the evidence points to a range more like 0.5-1.0%.

timmytokyo 7y ago
Agreed. The Swedish doctor was throwing around speculative numbers (e.g., 50% of UK and Sweden have already been infected) with absolutely no data or references to back it up. I find it hard to believe that he can be taken seriously by anyone.
fernly 7y ago
> The virus has already killed over 0.1% of the entire population of New York City Wait, what? That would be one person in every 1000? Population of 8,398,748[1] that would be... huh. Confirmed deaths, 8,448[2]. Nice, as they say on another site. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City [2] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page
9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
His thinking is that a) fatalities are on the order of 0.1% (might be 2-3x higher) and that b) 50% of the population of the UK, Sweden and (presumably) NYC is already infected. I agree that this seems overly optimistic, but the high end of that range seems plausible in light of the figures we're seeing, no? That is, if we're at 0.1% fatalities at (say) 25% infected, then that would imply 0.2% at 50%.
mjburgess 7y ago
The current estimate is that 2/3rds of deaths "due to" C19 are just people who would have died anyway dying a little early. The relevant number is excess deaths due to C19, which are hard to estimate during a pandemic. That will be much lower than these numbers being reported.

timmytokyo 7y ago

Agreed. The Swedish doctor was throwing around speculative numbers (e.g., 50% of UK and Sweden have already been infected) with absolutely no data or references to back it up. I find it hard to believe that he can be taken seriously by anyone.

fernly 7y ago

> The virus has already killed over 0.1% of the entire population of New York City Wait, what? That would be one person in every 1000? Population of 8,398,748[1] that would be... huh. Confirmed deaths, 8,448[2]. Nice, as they say on another site. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City [2] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago

His thinking is that a) fatalities are on the order of 0.1% (might be 2-3x higher) and that b) 50% of the population of the UK, Sweden and (presumably) NYC is already infected. I agree that this seems overly optimistic, but the high end of that range seems plausible in light of the figures we're seeing, no? That is, if we're at 0.1% fatalities at (say) 25% infected, then that would imply 0.2% at 50%.

mjburgess 7y ago

The current estimate is that 2/3rds of deaths "due to" C19 are just people who would have died anyway dying a little early. The relevant number is excess deaths due to C19, which are hard to estimate during a pandemic. That will be much lower than these numbers being reported.