[SHKMAN1212]

One of the problems with this model is that it is not taking into account a few variables. First of all, he (nor any other source) are backing out the recovery cases. Secondly, they're not factoring in the incubation period for the disease to get an accurate reading of the actual mortality rate (you cannot simply take total deaths and divide by the total cases if it takes 7-10 days from the date of diagnosis to death). Lastly, he isn't explaining how this reaches a pandemic without a geometric increase in the number of cases. To achieve a more accurate reading on the growth of infections you MUST back out the Chinese numbers since they are neither accurate nor updated on a regular basis.

The good news is that there isn't a geometric increase in the number of cases. The bad news is that the mortality rate is closer to 7% instead of the 4% that they're stating.

[FreepForever]

However, there might be two possible errors in this model.

First, the epidemic started in China last November, but only made known to the world in March 10. Due to the shortened time span, this will make the model's rate of increase highly exaggerated.

Second, I don't believe the data China published previously AND even presently reflect any truth of the real situation. Since China's figure constitutes almost half of the total case, this will make the number of total case greatly underestimated.

These two possible may cancel out and offset each other depending on which is greater. And I really don't know on which side that it eventually will fall.

Let us hope that this number cruncher is wrong and on the high side.