undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmarvin6y ago0 comments

Hm, ok. That would make it in the region of 1%. Thought my numbers were out of date since I heard 0.6% somewhere else.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

easytiger6y ago· 2 in thread

1% of what?

8000-ish cases. 70-ish deaths => ~0.9% fatality rate. Very thorough testing, so 0.9% is likely to be a reasonable estimate of the real fatality rate.

Granted, 250k-ish of 50 million is a small sample, but you've got to assume that they haven't tested randomly but tested people who have been in touch with known cases.

easytiger6y ago

You are almost there.

> but you've got to assume that they haven't tested randomly but tested people who have been in touch with known cases

Yes. Well with symptoms etc. So of the people who got tested they are much more likely to test +ve. I agree. Which means real cases are massively more widespread than those tested.

It is believed here in the UK that this has been fairly rife for a while now, but those who got it are not statistically counted anywhere. The real fatality rate is way less than 0.9

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse