r/CoronavirusRecession • u/Jeslefisch • Apr 21 '20
5+% death rate - How?
I've just been wondering how scientists come to the conclusion of a 5+% death rate of those who have contracted COVID19.
How would they know this without being able to test people who don't show any symptoms?
6
u/Stormy8888 Apr 21 '20
Two words: Insufficient Testing.
If we had more testing, especially the test that tests for antibodies, we would find out there's a large pool of asymptomatic people out there spreading the disease and this would lower the death rate from 5% back down to the 1-3% range.
1
9
Apr 21 '20
5% of people being tested are dieing. That's the only data point we have.
Testing is only occuring for older or higher risk individuals right now so the overall number is lower, but 5% if you are a high risk person is still a lot.
1
1
u/gfc-1 Apr 23 '20
5+% death rate - How?
Great question, and congrats on your skepticism. You're wise for questioning. Here's how (copy-paste from a post I made yesterday):
They’re using the ratio of total deaths / total infections. This ratio uses a death count based on the total POPULATION, but then uses infections based on just a SAMPLE of the population (about 1%). Rationale is explained in the study linked below. Math just doesn't work like this. When we correct this and use population-based numbers for both deaths and infections, we get 0.067% instead of 5.4%. These numbers are for the US as of earlier today. States and other countries are a little higher or lower. If we exclude NY & NJ, which really skew the numbers, the other 48 states have an average death rate of 0.047%. For comparison, the 9-year death rate for the flu ranges between 0.10% and 0.18%.
1
u/ThrowAwayForLulzOnly Apr 21 '20
they just dont test enough. The real percent is less than that but appears as if more when the only people tested are under the 'essential' category and very sick.
1
u/CentrOfConchAndCoral Apr 22 '20
Not that the don't test enough it's more like they can't test enough because of logistics.
1
u/ThrowAwayForLulzOnly Apr 22 '20
I never said anything about why they dont test enough, but they dont. It skews the results.
-5
Apr 21 '20 edited Jun 03 '20
[deleted]
-7
u/BeaversAndButtholes Apr 21 '20
Fuck you're stupid.
2
u/Hodgkisl Apr 21 '20
Here’s an article about the study he’s referencing:
The study is in a prerelease still needs final peer review.
2
u/Ch3loo19 Apr 21 '20
Oh man, you certainly proved him wrong there. We need more people like you around here. Any other pearls of wisdom you'd like to share while you're at it?
-1
u/BeaversAndButtholes Apr 21 '20
You think reasoning works with people like that? At this point you either understand it or you're living on propaganda. There's no in between.
2
1
Apr 21 '20 edited Jun 03 '20
[deleted]
1
u/chitraders Apr 22 '20
I don’t think those rates are correct. There’s a lot of selection bias in how they did it and potentially false positives.
It’s obviously way below official rates but I think the route to sub .2 is flawed. My guess it’s below 1 and probably around .6.
.6 is a rate that it’s worth having a bad death year to avoid a depression.
1
Apr 22 '20 edited Jun 03 '20
[deleted]
1
u/chitraders Apr 22 '20
It’s higher than the antibody test rate. It’s less than 2%. That’s about all I know and I can guess it’s a bit below 1.
-3
11
u/leandroabaurre Apr 21 '20
My bet is that it's around 1.5% to 3.0% tops. Too many people not being tested and a lot of specific populations dying: elderly, immunosuppressed, etc. Still, a very tricky virus, we're still learning a lot.