The article’s author is citing bogus statistics. The IFR of the virus is 2.5%.
Even if you divide the number of dead by the total population you get a value greater than the low end of his claimed range. But that is not the correct way of calculating IFR. Also, IFR is misleading in and of itself. It is a way to include every case under the assumption that everybody that has not died so far will live. If you include only resolved cases, then the CFR is 3.9%.
Perhaps he meant that high end .09something estimate to be 9.something%. Think about that - 1 in 11 dies. That’s a big nothing, right? That’s what Italy had after their HCS collapsed. In their own words, a “whole generation” was taken. Maybe some of you all that are so vocal about the mitigation efforts aren’t just ODD. Maybe you’re just impatient for your inheritance.
No, you are citing bogus statistics. IFR in NYC in April was 1% (0.25% of the population died and 25% had antibodies). NYC was our worst case with terrible leadership and collapsed hospitals like Elmhurst. Our overall CFR has gone down since April about about 5X although a lot of that is because it's not NYC (New Orleans, Detroit, etc).
Part of the improvement is better treatments and younger cases. We don't know the exact IFR nationwide but it's certainly less than 1%. Some studies show as low as 0.25% 2-3 times as deadly as the worst flu. Bad but not that bad.