3 ms·

My understanding is that the current estimated IFR from those studies (NY specially) is between 0.6% and 1.2%. I think flu is around 0.1% (however I am not sure

by rocha 6y ago

My understanding is that the current estimated IFR from those studies (NY specially) is between 0.6% and 1.2%. I think flu is around 0.1% (however I am not sure if that is the CFR or the IFR). The second factor to consider is the attack rate, how many people are likely to get infected. For flu is around between 10% to 15% of the total population, while for Covid it is, potentially, larger than 80% (no natural immunity and no vaccines). It is however unlikely that it will reach that level given the current containment and mitigation measures. But if it reaches something like 40% (double of the latest NY estimate), it will mean covid is between 16 to 48 times deadlier than the flu.

throwaway894345 6y ago
Yes, sorry, I thought we were comparing IFR and not CFR.
- rocha 6y ago
  No worries, I had made the same mistake. I just wanted to point out that the attack rate is also part of the fatality equation, and it is commonly not taken into account.
Lewton 6y ago
I believe 0.1% is the CFR for the flu, and the IFR is close to 0.04%?
- rocha 6y ago
  Thanks. I have seen serious estimates of 0.1% CFR for the 1957 and 1964 flu pandemics, but only notes saying that the seasonal flu CFR is <0.1%. Do you have a source for the 0.04% IFR?
  - Lewton 6y ago
    No (hence the question mark), I'm seeing 0.04% pop up everywhere but I haven't found the source for the number. But it seems plausible if the CFR is <0.1% as there are both asymptomatic cases of the flu and people don't always go to the doctor even if they have symptoms. It seems like caring about IFR was rare before this pandemic and the lockdown
    - rocha 6y ago
      Got it. Thanks. I think it may be because the IFR is less reliable, since for most diseases it requires a gross estimation the real number of infected persons. It is probably more popular these days because people are putting a lot of effort into the comparisons with the seasonal flu.
- votepaunchy 6y ago
  IFR for flu is less than 0.1% according to the CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
  - Lewton 6y ago
    That's not the IFR since they're not counting asymptomatic cases (based on a quick read) They don't mention IFR anywhere as far as I can see

by rocha 6y ago

throwaway894345 6y ago

Yes, sorry, I thought we were comparing IFR and not CFR.

rocha 6y ago
No worries, I had made the same mistake. I just wanted to point out that the attack rate is also part of the fatality equation, and it is commonly not taken into account.

Lewton 6y ago

I believe 0.1% is the CFR for the flu, and the IFR is close to 0.04%?

rocha 6y ago
Thanks. I have seen serious estimates of 0.1% CFR for the 1957 and 1964 flu pandemics, but only notes saying that the seasonal flu CFR is <0.1%. Do you have a source for the 0.04% IFR?
- Lewton 6y ago
  No (hence the question mark), I'm seeing 0.04% pop up everywhere but I haven't found the source for the number. But it seems plausible if the CFR is <0.1% as there are both asymptomatic cases of the flu and people don't always go to the doctor even if they have symptoms. It seems like caring about IFR was rare before this pandemic and the lockdown
  - rocha 6y ago
    Got it. Thanks. I think it may be because the IFR is less reliable, since for most diseases it requires a gross estimation the real number of infected persons. It is probably more popular these days because people are putting a lot of effort into the comparisons with the seasonal flu.
votepaunchy 6y ago
IFR for flu is less than 0.1% according to the CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
- Lewton 6y ago
  That's not the IFR since they're not counting asymptomatic cases (based on a quick read) They don't mention IFR anywhere as far as I can see