2 ms·
99.9% would have been more precise, which aligns well with the current numbers.
by s9w 6y ago
99.9% would have been more precise, which aligns well with the current numbers.
- pwinnski 6y agoThe term "survival rate" applies to the infected, not the entire population. When a plane wipes out against a mountain in the Andes, you don't use the population of the entire country to claim that the survival rate of the crash was high, you count only the people who were actually in the plane. So 209,454 deaths suggests a 96% survival rate[0], based on our current information. Perhaps more to the point, since humans are generally bad at visualizing statistics, 209,454 people have died, making COVID-19 the third-highest cause of death[1] in the USA this year so far. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ [1] https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200818/covid-the-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-us https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200818/covid-the-third-lea...
- s9w 6y agoSurvival rate = 1-Ifr. Ifr is ~0.1% so 99.9% is right. There were no 200k corona deaths in the US.
- pwinnski 6y agoThere have been more than 200k deaths from COVID-19, and the year is not yet over. I linked to information supporting the number I gave. I actually think the number is a bit higher, since not all deaths triggered by COVID-19 are necessarily reported with COVID-19 as a comorbidity[0]. But there are certainly not fewer! [0] https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus-deaths-cdc/ https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus...