3 ms·

Again, the current worldwide figure is 7%, with two thirds of the known cases still pending. Even if absolutely 0 of the pending cases turn into deaths, and th

Again, the current worldwide figure is 7%, with two thirds of the known cases still pending. Even if absolutely 0 of the pending cases turn into deaths, and the true percentage of cases that are undetected is the full 50% that has been mentioned recently, that still puts us well above 3%. Arithmetic: 7 in 100 right now. Add 0 to deaths, resolve all open cases and discover double the known case count: 7 in 200, 3.5% --- For the surveys you mentioned. The Roosevelt still has active cases. The Princess likewise did at the time that article was written. You're citing that 0.5% figure incorrectly: that's a projection from the Diamond Princess onto China. I found a different source for the German survey -- that link isn't working for some reason. The same applies there. Most importantly, these surveys are not representative of the global population. See above. The recent results that have shown 50% asymptomatic cases are not conclusive yet, because it's too soon to say that all of those people will never have symptoms. I would be ecstatic if I was wrong; I would love it if the upper estimate for asymptomatic cases was correct, and we had far fewer deaths than anyone's expecting. But it's just not in the numbers right now.

sdffdsfdsfsddsf 6y ago
"Again, the current worldwide figure is 7%, with two thirds of the known cases still pending." No. You can not simply calculate the death rate by dividing known deaths by known cases. Those numbers depend on who got tested and on how deaths are being counted, which also varies greatly from country to country. For starters, people who have severe symptoms are more likely to show up at hospitals and get tested. That introduces a huge bias already. "You're citing that 0.5% figure incorrectly" No I didn't, read what I wrote. And ALL numbers are projections. Even your calculation is a projection. Your calculation is an extraordinarily simplistic projection. Scientists hopefully make better projections, because they account for more influencing factors. "The recent results that have shown 50% asymptomatic cases are not conclusive yet, because it's too soon to say that all of those people will never have symptoms" What makes you so sure? It seems possible to make an estimate of when somebody got infected, especially in those studies of closed communities. After two weeks or so (scientists would determine a more prices number), it would be reasonable to assume they won't develop symptoms.

sdffdsfdsfsddsf 6y ago

"Again, the current worldwide figure is 7%, with two thirds of the known cases still pending." No. You can not simply calculate the death rate by dividing known deaths by known cases. Those numbers depend on who got tested and on how deaths are being counted, which also varies greatly from country to country. For starters, people who have severe symptoms are more likely to show up at hospitals and get tested. That introduces a huge bias already. "You're citing that 0.5% figure incorrectly" No I didn't, read what I wrote. And ALL numbers are projections. Even your calculation is a projection. Your calculation is an extraordinarily simplistic projection. Scientists hopefully make better projections, because they account for more influencing factors. "The recent results that have shown 50% asymptomatic cases are not conclusive yet, because it's too soon to say that all of those people will never have symptoms" What makes you so sure? It seems possible to make an estimate of when somebody got infected, especially in those studies of closed communities. After two weeks or so (scientists would determine a more prices number), it would be reasonable to assume they won't develop symptoms.