Because fatality rate means how many die OUT OF HOW MANY WERE SICK.
Good God, why is this falsehood of comparing recovered to dead propagating as meaningful?
The quality of the numbers can’t be assessed with certainty at this point, but they look to be mediocre to junk. That comparison does have some logic to it.
The point is, it is early in the cycle and using the 2.2% figure is misleading. Without a doubt, the 60% figure is misleading - even assuming China has started telling the truth on their numbers.
The fatality rate is not a very certain number at all in this part of the cycle. While more comforting though, the 2.2% figure and the 60% figure are similarly uncertain, since the 2.2% figure is more based upon the spread rate than it is the actual fatality rate.
Because fatality rate means how many die OUT OF HOW MANY WERE SICK.