3 ms·

Here is a WHO report from February saying the same thing: > Modeling is a helpful tool to try to account for missed cases, such as those that are mild cases po

Here is a WHO report from February saying the same thing: > Modeling is a helpful tool to try to account for missed cases, such as those that are mild cases potentially missed in current surveillance activities, and the time lag between onset and death. Using an estimated number of total infections, the Infection Fatality Ratio can be calculated. This represents the fraction of all infections (both diagnosed and undiagnosed) that result in death. Based on these available analyses, current IFR estimates range from 0.3% to 1%. Without population-based serologic studies, it is not yet possible to know what proportion of the population has been infected with COVID-19. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200219-sitrep-30-covid-19.pdf https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situati...

acqq 6y ago
It is a report dated 19th February! Also note that this estimate is based exclusively on the Chinese data(!) and that it practically confirms that the Chinese data were usable for the estimates even as there were doubts spread by the media and politicians. Specifically in the same report it is written (1): "Using an estimated number of total infections, the Infection Fatality Ratio can be calculated. This represents the fraction of all infections (both diagnosed and undiagnosed) that result in death. Based on these available analyses, current IFR estimates range from 0.3% to 1%." And then: "Without population-based serologic studies, it is not yet possible to know what proportion of the population has been infected with COVID-19." So even without the population-based antibody (that is what "serologic" means) data, and only using the Chinese data "as of 11 February" available to the WHO the estimate was quite good. The range depends of course also on the age structure of the population -- the countries with much more young people would have closer to the lower number, the others closer to the higher. 1) Edit: the parent post quoted the same segment later too
- skeletor_999 6y ago
  Another consideration is whether or not the Chinese data has been reliable at later dates. The Chinese government did eject foreign journalists in March https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035 There have been some doubts regarding the accuracy of later numbers: https://fortune.com/2020/04/24/china-coronavirus-data-real-lancet-study/ https://fortune.com/2020/04/24/china-coronavirus-data-real-l...

acqq 6y ago

It is a report dated 19th February! Also note that this estimate is based exclusively on the Chinese data(!) and that it practically confirms that the Chinese data were usable for the estimates even as there were doubts spread by the media and politicians. Specifically in the same report it is written (1): "Using an estimated number of total infections, the Infection Fatality Ratio can be calculated. This represents the fraction of all infections (both diagnosed and undiagnosed) that result in death. Based on these available analyses, current IFR estimates range from 0.3% to 1%." And then: "Without population-based serologic studies, it is not yet possible to know what proportion of the population has been infected with COVID-19." So even without the population-based antibody (that is what "serologic" means) data, and only using the Chinese data "as of 11 February" available to the WHO the estimate was quite good. The range depends of course also on the age structure of the population -- the countries with much more young people would have closer to the lower number, the others closer to the higher. 1) Edit: the parent post quoted the same segment later too

skeletor_999 6y ago
Another consideration is whether or not the Chinese data has been reliable at later dates. The Chinese government did eject foreign journalists in March https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035 There have been some doubts regarding the accuracy of later numbers: https://fortune.com/2020/04/24/china-coronavirus-data-real-lancet-study/ https://fortune.com/2020/04/24/china-coronavirus-data-real-l...