4 ms·
> I still call this a significant risk given the 5% fatality rate. The infection fatality rate is not remotely close to 5%. It's remarkable that we are now ove
by AndrewBissell 5y ago
> I still call this a significant risk given the 5% fatality rate.
The infection fatality rate is not remotely close to 5%. It's remarkable that we are now over 18 months into this pandemic and so much of the public is still in the thrall of the fearmongering and misinformation about the real magnitude of the threat SARS-CoV-2 poses -- especially to them personally, if they are not in a high-risk group.
- skyde 5y agoAll CDC and WHO stats are reporting CFR between 5% and 10% depending on country. if you are above 60year old it’s most often above 10% https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210307/Study-analyzes-COVID-fatality-rate-using-age-and-GDP-as-proxies-for-the-quality-and-abundance-of-healthcare.aspx https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210307/Study-analyzes-CO...
- skyde 5y agoSo is it more important that anti-vaxer go to restaurant or that the 60+ population does not get forced to stay home to avoid hospitalization?
- AndrewBissell 5y agoI talk about IFR (which is the relevant risk metric for "fatality rate," since anyone might get a non-confirmed infection) and you link to an article citing CFR data as of July 2020? This doesn't even line up with the CFR numbers you get when you type "US coronavirus cases" into Google.