RE: COVID19 mortality, from the CDC:
"Nevertheless, given the residual uncertainties, health sector decision-makers and disease modelers probably should consider a broad range of 0.25%–3.0% for COVID-19 case-fatality risk estimates. “ https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article
RE: Flu mortality, from the CDC:
"CDC estimates that influenza was associated with more than 35.5 million illnesses, more than 16.5 million medical visits, 490,600 hospitalizations, and 34,200 deaths during the 2018–2019 influenza season.”
Every year’s crop of influenza viruses are different than the last, with different mortality rates. But taking the recent stats we arrive at 34,200 deaths /3,550,000 estimated cases= 0.01%
COVID19 mortality 0.25%
Influenza (typical) mortality 0.01%
I would say a more accurate statement would be “The fatality rate from COVID-19 is PROJECTED to be AT LEAST 25 times greater than the flu”
Also:
This assumes that the number of infected will be the same for both viruses. There is no way to know what that will be. Could be much higher or much lower depending on how effective our mitigation plan/execution are.
By the way, discussing mortality rates of anything is a dismal conversation, but a single number rarely shows the human cost of something. If we look at the mortality rate of American soldiers in combat in WW2, one estimate is about 0.01. This is from the website of the National WW2 Museum in New Orleans (a must-see place for every American). Combat survivability (out of 1,000): 8.6 were killed in action,
Of course, this number likely compares the total number of armed forces to the total number of killed in action, a figure of arguable utility, because not everyone in uniform was in a combat zone. But it does provide a sad perspective.
…and I wouldn’t argue with your wording.
I did choose my wording, however, because it provides enough accuracy to be useful, without making a claim to mathematical certainty.
In Italy and France they have not even been counting coronavirus deaths of those who have died at home or in nursing homes. (“A Deluged System Leaves Some Elderly to Die, Rocking Spain’s Self Image,” New York Times, March 25, 2020.)
It’s a model, not a measurement or a control input. As George Box famously wrote “All models are wrong but some are useful.” If you think it is not useful, offer an alternative that is better than a doctor with a flashlight.
It seemed to that @Earl_Boebert1 was suggesting I thought the models were not useful and wanted to correct that incorrect assumption (if that was his assumption… I don’t know which is why I asked)
Models from professional entities (such as the CDC) are very useful. What I found less than useful is incorrectly quoting the findings of the models (20 times as deadly vice the correct 25 times as deadly) and also using wording that could lead to incorrect conclusions by the reader (the death rate IS this as opposed to it’s PROJECTED to be A RANGE between x and y).
I further find the ‘well, it was kinda close’ response to be not useful when the precise results of the modeling are available.
Just ‘polishing’… Another term I’ve recently added to my rhetorician toolbox
I would take it to mean that as well. It just doesn’t correspond to the results of the CDC’s model as quoted. The modeling results were a death rate from 0.25% to 3%, or another way, 25 to 300 times as deadly.
China has draconian monitoring of the movements of individuals within their boarders. It was reported in the news back in January that they used this to contact trace every single individual from Wuhan when they left their province. This cut down on transmission in a huge way.
That level of individual monitoring isn’t tolerated in most countries, especially Europe and North America, so the disease spread unchecked.
Your latest conspiracy theory??
Maybe you should check the facts before posting any more of this type.
It is true that a large part of China escaped major outbreak, but Hubei province and some of the neighbouring provinces did not.
Over 60 mill. people were put in lock down to avoid spreading the virus within China
PS> That this happened during CNY, which have millions of Chinese on the move, made the task of limiting the spread even more difficult.
PPS> A lot of those leaving Hubei/Wuhan in the early days of the outbreak was foreigners, or Chinese working overseas trying to return to their jobs.
yes the conspiracy that nobody from wuhan went any further than a neighboring province?
What were the chances when it looks like one couple did all the damage in Italy?
60 million, less than 10% of the population
100% of Singapore, Uk, Australia etc is in some form of lock down and so should everyone be yet china fixed it with 10%, dream on…
Thats the the same China that put the whistle blower Doctor in prison
I think there is some news missing?? “It is true that a large part of China escaped major outbreak”,
you have a source inside china?
