Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The most widespread testing so far shows that COVID-19 has a fatality rate of 0.004%. That’s lower than the flu. Should we start shutting everything down, every year, because of the flu?
Wordpress ^ | April 12, 2020 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

Posted on 04/12/2020 1:26:02 PM PDT by grundle

The most widespread testing so far shows that COVID-19 has a fatality rate of 0.004%. That’s lower than the flu. Should we start shutting everything down, every year, because of the flu?

Iceland has tested 10% of its population for COVID-19, by far the largest percentage of any country.

And it has discovered that the fatality rate is 0.004%.

That’s lower than the flu.

Should we start shutting everything down, every year, because of the flu?


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: cookingcovidrates; coronavirus; covid; covidcaptivity; covidphobia; hysteriavirus; iceland; testing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-131 next last
To: VanDeKoik

Did the swine flu repeat in waves also?

Nobody knows.


41 posted on 04/12/2020 2:26:00 PM PDT by US_MilitaryRules (I'm not tired of Winning yet! Please, continue on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: grundle

I think much of this has to do with leftists/Libs wanting to shut down Free Americans and Free America.


42 posted on 04/12/2020 2:26:13 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

What state and county do you live?


43 posted on 04/12/2020 2:26:23 PM PDT by ARW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All

0.004% of the population of Iceland (above stated to be 357k) is 14.28. There’s a typo evident in the earlier statement about infections and deaths so I don’t know the actual death toll. The actual infection rate from 10% testing is 261 showing that the total number likely to have it would be around 2610 (2k to 3k a reasonable range). If the death toll from 3k was 0.004% the expected number of deaths is 0.12, or one eighth of a person.

The upper end of my projected number of infections is about one per cent of the population of Iceland. Surely we would be expecting a higher saturation than that in our own case, maybe Iceland has been cut off from incoming potential spreaders more effectively.

At any rate, I find this percentage if meant to apply to all persons who receive an infection, even asymptomatic, to be questionable as in too small, more likely to be in the vicinity of 0.1%. For example, in my home province of BC there have been about 100 deaths so far. The total population here is four million. For 100 deaths to be 0.004% of the number of infections, we would have needed a total number of infections to reach 2.5 million or 60% of our population. If it were that high, most people have already had the thing and were either asymptomatic or recovered from whatever they did have. If my number of 0.1% is correct, then to reach 100 deaths, 100,000 people or 2.5% of the population would have been exposed. That may be a bit low, so the actual percentage could be closer to 0.05%.

An unknown would be how many of the already exposed could contract a second bout and the outcome of that.


44 posted on 04/12/2020 2:27:27 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell (Pray for health, economic recovery, and justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ARW

Tennessee, Anderson

https://www.tn.gov/health/cedep/ncov.html


45 posted on 04/12/2020 2:32:50 PM PDT by HangnJudge (China Lied, People died, Never Forget, this Decade's 9-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

You don’t understand fatality rate. How many have it but with no symptoms or mild symptoms. You don’t know because they aren’t being tested. You need that number to know the tru mortality rate

Germany has tested many with and without symptoms. There overall mortality rate is less than .01


46 posted on 04/12/2020 2:38:00 PM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

This is consistent with German results


47 posted on 04/12/2020 2:38:47 PM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Nifster

Perhaps, we will know as local population testing is done, also, honestly we do not know the false positive / false negative statistics. On their assay


48 posted on 04/12/2020 2:40:40 PM PDT by HangnJudge (China Lied, People died, Never Forget, this Decade's 9-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

Your county has way more cases than that. They just haven’t been tested.


49 posted on 04/12/2020 2:42:12 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 9422WMR
They screwed the economy for this small number?

Yep.

50 posted on 04/12/2020 2:42:42 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

No. That’s not how you do it. Those are ones admitted to hospital. Over 36,000 have been tested. At least fifty percent had it with no symptoms

7/18000 is indeed .0004


51 posted on 04/12/2020 2:43:31 PM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
7 divided by 1600 is 0.4%, not 0.004%.

7 people died.

182,000 have the virus.

7 divided by 182,000 is 0.4%.

52 posted on 04/12/2020 2:47:11 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All

So I had a look at the actual newspaper article. Not sure what actual numbers are tested, infected for Iceland, but apparently it’s seven actual deaths. For seven to be 0.004% it would represent a number of infected persons equal to about 175,000. (If you’re playing along at home, 0.004% is equal to the fraction 1/25,000).

Perhaps we could gain more useful insight from the UK numbers despite a lower testing rate. These are

“As of yesterday, the UK had tested 316,836 people of its 66.4 million population, with 73,758 confirmed infections. This translates to 0.48 per cent of the population swabbed.

Of those infected, 8,958 have died, a case fatality rate of around 0.12 per cent, notably higher than Iceland’s.”


Now, it seems likely to me that they would test a more vulnerable segment of the population, so bear that in mind as I analyze those numbers as if they were actually totally representative of random distribution (they may not be).

The infection rate is 23.3% of the sample (may equate to 15 or 20 per cent of a larger, less vulnerable total).

The death rate they cite makes no mathematical sense (0.12%) since 8,958 is 0.12% of just under 750,000 infected. That number is ten times the number found in the sample, and relates to perhaps 5% of the UK population (perhaps 10% or even 20% if you accept a sample of the vulnerable) rather than the 0.5% of the sample, of the total population.

The only way that it makes sense is for the overall infection rate to be considerably lower than the sample taken.

Since there are possible problems with both the Iceland and UK numbers, I think it’s basically a do-over situation here.


53 posted on 04/12/2020 2:49:23 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell (Pray for health, economic recovery, and justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
I meant:

7 people died.

182,000 have the virus.

7 divided by 182,000 is 0.004%.

54 posted on 04/12/2020 2:50:08 PM PDT by grundle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: grundle; humblegunner

Mathematically challenged blog pimp.


55 posted on 04/12/2020 2:50:51 PM PDT by datura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BereanBrain

what if thousands have had it with no severe symptoms?

They have.


56 posted on 04/12/2020 2:51:15 PM PDT by Carry me back (Cut the feds by 90%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik

VanDeKoik wrote: “If it isnt a flu....then why are you using an actual flu from 100 years ago to push an assumption that there would be “highly lethal” waves in the future?”

I didn’t say that this wasn’t the flu. It was the flu then. It is the flu now. I’m pointing out how mistaken it was to believe then that there was no reason to be concerned. We do not need to make the same mistake they made.

Since the Spanish Flu of 1918 had multiple waves of increasing severity is an example that this flu could also.


57 posted on 04/12/2020 2:51:32 PM PDT by DugwayDuke ("A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Carry me back

There were some thoughts over 2 weeks ago that possible over 6 million Americans have had it, but got over it without going to the hospital. The numbers dying from it are very low. We ‘ve been lied to.


58 posted on 04/12/2020 2:54:00 PM PDT by Carry me back (Cut the feds by 90%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Nifster
0.004% is the correct arithmetic.

The problem is that since the average time between infection and death (if it happens) is 23.5 days, you need to compare deaths to what the case count was 23.5 days ago. *IF* cases have been doubling every 3 days, as they have in some states, then that 0.004% becomes 0.9% - 9 times as high as the flu.

59 posted on 04/12/2020 2:59:41 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: grundle

Fail at Math. Try Phys Ed.


60 posted on 04/12/2020 2:59:54 PM PDT by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-131 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson