3 ms·

As best I can tell, the Imperial College report (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NP

by wahern 7y ago

As best I can tell, the Imperial College report (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...) got its numbers from this study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357v... The derived IFR is still <1% (0.66%), but I'll admit it seems unjustifiably high given the inconsistent reporting out of China. It would have been better characterized, at least qualitatively, as somewhat pessimistic, given all the assumptions.

guscost 7y ago
Ah right, the 0.9% is after adjusting for the age distribution of Great Britain: > These estimates were corrected for non-uniform attack rates by age and when applied to the GB population result in an IFR of 0.9% with 4.4% of infections hospitalised (Table 1).