You have to read the article. I posted the link.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:41 pmOk, maybe the case fatality rate will be 0.3%.WiseOne wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2020 2:11 pm To follow up on Mountaineer's article, and also the posts I made earlier calculating projected COVID prevalence & mortality using the Diamond Princess cruise ship as the perfect test bed. I'd wondered if this was really going to be the apocalypse everyone is assuming, because the numbers weren't really adding up.
John Ioannidis, a Stanford professor whose career has been focused on effectively debunking clinical reports, published this article a few days ago questioning the appropriateness of the epidemic response. He did a similar (though more extensive) analysis of the Diamond Princess as I did, and concludes this:
Which is about the testing we don't have, but there are epidemiological methods that could be brought to bear. I'm wondering why no one is doing that. And how there is so little voice given to reasoned opinions like this in the media. Naw, that wouldn't be sensational enough.If we assume that case fatality rate among individuals infected by SARS-CoV-2 is 0.3% in the general population — a mid-range guess from my Diamond Princess analysis — and that 1% of the U.S. population gets infected (about 3.3 million people), this would translate to about 10,000 deaths. This sounds like a huge number, but it is buried within the noise of the estimate of deaths from “influenza-like illness.” If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of total deaths due to “influenza-like illness” would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average. The media coverage would have been less than for an NBA game between the two most indifferent teams.
...
One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric. At a minimum, we need unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making.
Where does he get the "1% of the U.S. population gets infected" part?
My understanding is that this is EXTREMELY contagious.
What if it is 50% of the US population?
1) COVID-19 is not even close to being as contagious as flu or measles. 2) He makes a point in the article that numbers in general are lacking, but that the cruise ship provides the best available data for estimating what COVID-19 will do in a general population. That's where the numbers come from, and he provides a range in the article. Go back and read it?
Yes I did miss your post kriegspiel. I'm sure this is making people angry indeed, because the whole thing has become very politicized. But I suspect the economic and collateral damage from the shelter in place orders is going to eclipse that from the virus itself. I'm already reading articles about patients waiting for transplant surgeries being bumped by hospitals in their zeal to cancel elective procedures, who are going to die because of it.
perfect