Figures presented as death rates seem to be ratios of dead to reported cases. More accurate would be deaths to recoveries and will not be known until the WuHanFlu has run its course. Even then it won’t include mild cases which never even get reported and are apparently more numerous than the hospitalizations. Many people get a mild dose and just stay home for a while.
“Many people get a mild dose and just stay home for a while.”
—
Could be many, could be just a few. The x variable is a problem with things like this. But it is more likely that many did just tough it out - and that many still are, since it might manifest as a slight cold.
The textbook formula.
Works very well for historical epidemics, where everyone has already run the full course of the disease.
Deaths/completed cases give a more accurate read on the actual rate for ongoing epidemics.
If we could offset the numbers to account for the differing lengths of the disease process, i.e. if someone either recovers of dies quickly the formula works pretty well. If most people linger for months before dying, or recover quickly, the perceived rate will be front loaded with reported recoveries, with a fund of will-be-dead waiting in the wings to boost the rate at the end.