3 ms·
IFR is a linear combination of age groups and their associated risk. It turns out NYC was an unmitigated disaster around nursing homes. That'll drive up the sta
by gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
IFR is a linear combination of age groups and their associated risk. It turns out NYC was an unmitigated disaster around nursing homes. That'll drive up the statistics quite a bit in that dead/population figure you're mentioning.
- TheCoelacanth 6y agoNYC has a median age of two years younger than the country as a whole. Age distribution is not a plausible explanation for NYC having a particularly large number of deaths from the outbreak.
- zaroth 6y agoIt sounds like you are assuming the virus spreads uniformly through the population. It does not. The median age of the population isn’t as relevant as the prevalence of the virus within specific demographics in the population. NYC may have a slightly smaller elderly population, but that won’t matter if the prevalence of the virus in their elderly population is, say, 2x higher than the national average. I’ve only been following it loosely, but apparently NYC brought the virus into their nursing homes by discharging SARS-CoV-2 positive patients back into them, and the IFR in a nursing home is certainly not 0.2%.
- mindslight 6y agoThe original comment is putting a bound on the case fatality rate by simplistically assuming everyone has been infected. The actual prevalence in nursing homes is irrelevant with that assumption. Nursing homes being prone to infection just tightens the bound.
- zaroth 6y agoI think you are misreading OP. They are saying the prevalence in nursing homes was higher (“an unmitigated disaster”) which drives up the average IFR.
- mindslight 6y agoMy comment applied to the comment you're referencing as well. The original comment is the one above that.