4 ms·
At least in the US, we are no longer in a period that qualifies as an "outbreak with a high daily increase". That implies a high increase relative to the curren
by jsight 6y ago
At least in the US, we are no longer in a period that qualifies as an "outbreak with a high daily increase". That implies a high increase relative to the current case count, which really isn't the case any more once you have a population case rate of 5%.
I would be cautious about estimating countries that are only now having their first major outbreak (for example Czechia) for exactly the reason that you cite, but not every country is in that state.
Put another way, we are no longer living with preliminary data in much of the world.
- woofie11 6y agoLet's toss some real numbers here. * Last death of Diamond Princess occurred after more than 2 months. * Over the past two months, the number of known cases in the US roughly doubled from 8 million to 16 million. This means there are a lot of people who haven't died yet, and dividing deaths by cases is an underestimate of CFR by up to a factor of 2. That doesn't mean we don't have the data. We could e.g. take the infections from June and look at how many of those resulted in death as a final CFR estimate. However, the number I gave (deaths over cases) didn't do that. It's a preliminary CFR without that sort of correction, and a correction to final IFR can go up (people who haven't died yet) or down (unidentified cases). anoncake argued this was an overestimate by definition, and anyone who said otherwise didn't have a clue. anoncake was wrong.