[null and void]

Everybody has had it. A tiny, tiny percentage of victims had a bad outcome.

If, for the first time in human history, we can count people who were never sick as part of the denominator, then it is a tiny, tiny percentage who are victims.

For the sake of accurate historical comparisons we should only count the overtly sick.

Going forward the Chinese Virus, with the ability to do PCR and antibody tests, will become the gold standard, looking back not so much.

Bring Out Your Dead

Post to me or FReep mail to be on/off the Bring Out Your Dead ping list.

The purpose of the “Bring Out Your Dead” ping list (formerly the “Ebola” ping list) is very early warning of emerging pandemics, as such it has a high false positive rate.

The false positive rate was 100%.

At some point we may well have a high mortality pandemic, and likely as not the “Bring Out Your Dead” threads will miss the beginning entirely.

*sigh* Such is life, and death...

If a quarantine saves just one child's or one old fart’s life, it's worth it.

[Mariner]

“For the sake of accurate historical comparisons we should only count the overtly sick. “

The way it has always been done.

It’s never been done any other way.

Its binary. You’re either sick or not.

And CFR is determined with the number of sick in the denominator.

[rb22982]

If they get it, and get antibodies from it, it does count as getting it, even if they don’t develop any negative or very mild symptoms - that shows you the actual rate of risk. Only counting cases that are bad massively screws up the denominator. Same thing with H1N1 - they originally thought it was a 1% death rate or higher and ultimately was lower than 0.1% after serious antibody studies on the back end.