I like Iceland’s data. One of the few places trying to do actual science, HOWEVER, their overall all population is small. It could be applied to a state with a similar population density, but the math cannot be applied for US as a whole.
Iceland has a population of about 357k. That means that it is similar to Wyoming. They have had about 261 documented cases andrews zero deaths.
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.