And thus you have self described your error in statistical analysis. Using the Diamond princess as a total subset, mortality is 0.85%, significantly down from your 2% just a little upthread. This demonstrates the p Value of any statistical analysis. So as the N goes up, you approach a better analysis. Of course, using your logic the difference between 2% and 0.85% is a 60% in mortality. So I guess in just the few hours I have followed this threat the mortality of this disease is fallen 60% Woo-hoo!
Please let the professional health care physicians and epidemiologists disseminate the actual truth.
Im reading your posts, and respectfully have to ask, if this not much worse than the regular flu, why did the Chinese take such drastic measures? Historically, it seems that China has been fairly tolerant of civilian deaths.
You missed the part about only 10 patients recovered, so far. 0.85% is not the final mortality rate. But it does put a bottom on the range for that subset.
I read your post 33.
In addition to nobody trusts China’s numbers, I don’t think it makes sense to talk about a “population” death rate on something so new. China’s incident rate, if you can believe it, reflects draconian measures. Measures that our leaders have expressed an unwillingness to contemplate. And People in Wuhan are still catching it and some are still dying from it.
It makes more sense to talk about the outcomes of confirmed cases. If we can keep the incident rate down awesome. But you don’t keep the incident rate down, by saying, as some here do, that it’s the same as the flu or a bad cold.