4 ms·
You are right, I missed that the number of tests was ~1 million, no way that was randon testing. So, probably the mortality rate is higher. I wonder if there
by raducu 6y ago
You are right, I missed that the number of tests was ~1 million, no way that was randon testing.
So, probably the mortality rate is higher.
I wonder if there is any bayesian tricks to estimate the infection range given 1/8 people got tested, regardless of selection bias.
edit: actually the overall deatheate could be lower, because we know the number of deaths, but not the exact number of infected -- if overall the infection rate is lower then 27%, the deathrate is lower than 1%.
- StanislavPetrov 6y agoNobody is suggesting the testing was random. The overall death rate and infection right could be either higher or lower, my only point is that you can't draw conclusions about the total population on a testing sample that wasn't random (and didn't try to be).
- rumanator 6y ago> because we know the number of deaths We only know estimates of the number of deaths. The correct number lies somewhere between the official number of covid19 fatalities and the total number of deaths during the same period, because one hand you have excessive mortality and on the other hand you have changes to the baseline due to changes in behavioral patterns. Excessive mortality are higher than officially recognized covid19 deaths and serve as a more accurate proxy for real covid19 deaths, but at the same time the baseline mortality might vary as well.
- raducu 6y agoDo you know any numbers for that excessive mortality in NYC? That would be pretty interesting.