See my post above, but it's a fair question. It's a question of how one wants to define survival. If you use the population of the U.S. then the numbers are correct. If you use the number of people infected and then die then the number is not correct. In that case, it is 94% survive. The person who originally posted this defined "survive" as not dying or not getting COVID-19 to get to the numbers. By if you only use CDC info, then you have to ask yourself, do they have the correct number? Not everybody was tested, they don't know who has been infected, most probably don't even report being sick, and many cases have no symptoms. So, what is a "true" number? I agree with the original post. use the Census and the number of people who died. That's the survival rate. Here's another viewpoint worth looking at: https://www.wthr.com/article/verify-twitter-posts-not-depicting-accurate-covid-19-survival-rates
6% case mortality is not even an accurate representation. If you want the REAL numbers you are going to need to test for antobodies AND test people for infection - so you can determine not just who is currently sick, but who was previously infected, whether they knew it or not.
Then you can determine the true survivability.
This is why OP's stats are likely fairly accurate. We are talking about a factor of as much as 10 to 50 fold infection rates among the population as we continue to do these serum tests for antibodies and keep finding a surprising number of people with antibodies who were asymptomatic, regardless of this shutdown.
And even THEN you have to separate the deaths that were attributed incorrectly to COVID, and further subtract out the all-cause mortality rate based on those who would have died anyway, infected or not.
I always hear only 20% of people are actually symptomatic. Now let’s assume all of the symptomatic people are counted as infected (which more than likely isn’t the case). As of now the US has roughly 1,500,000 confirmed cases. If this is truly 20% of the cases then we can assume that the true number of cases(symptomatic and a-symptomatic) is around 7,500,000. Personally I think the number is higher but that’s another story. The US currently reports roughly 91,000 deaths and seeing as though death isn’t a-symptomatic let’s assume that this is the correct value....which I also doubt again. 91,000 deaths in a total of 7,500,000 yields a mortality rate of 1.21%. Now what does that mean? It means this is all a bunch of bull crap and shit needs to open up again. The virus is shit and their numbers are shit.
The person who posted this originally got their statistics using the United States Census Bureau estimated the U.S. population in 2019 to be 328,239,523. And when you do the math based on that, about 99.975% of the population has not died of COVID-19 as of yet. Link: https://www.census.gov/en.html. However, if you also add the estimated illegal immigrants then you get to 99.983%
This is good, but if we could get a more expanded screenshot with more statistics (with as-of dates) we can paste to non-believers, I think that would be quite helpful to get the word out. "Don't believe me, here's the numbers, along with sources?"
Pointing to the census is good, but they'll never check it unless we piecemeal it first.
With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people?
You have to live through the loss of Net Neutrality first.
I died when Guam capsized, and if that wasn't bad enough, my corpse caught on fire due to global warming
And the tax cuts.
Needs source
See my post above, but it's a fair question. It's a question of how one wants to define survival. If you use the population of the U.S. then the numbers are correct. If you use the number of people infected and then die then the number is not correct. In that case, it is 94% survive. The person who originally posted this defined "survive" as not dying or not getting COVID-19 to get to the numbers. By if you only use CDC info, then you have to ask yourself, do they have the correct number? Not everybody was tested, they don't know who has been infected, most probably don't even report being sick, and many cases have no symptoms. So, what is a "true" number? I agree with the original post. use the Census and the number of people who died. That's the survival rate. Here's another viewpoint worth looking at: https://www.wthr.com/article/verify-twitter-posts-not-depicting-accurate-covid-19-survival-rates
6% case mortality is not even an accurate representation. If you want the REAL numbers you are going to need to test for antobodies AND test people for infection - so you can determine not just who is currently sick, but who was previously infected, whether they knew it or not.
Then you can determine the true survivability.
This is why OP's stats are likely fairly accurate. We are talking about a factor of as much as 10 to 50 fold infection rates among the population as we continue to do these serum tests for antibodies and keep finding a surprising number of people with antibodies who were asymptomatic, regardless of this shutdown.
And even THEN you have to separate the deaths that were attributed incorrectly to COVID, and further subtract out the all-cause mortality rate based on those who would have died anyway, infected or not.
I always hear only 20% of people are actually symptomatic. Now let’s assume all of the symptomatic people are counted as infected (which more than likely isn’t the case). As of now the US has roughly 1,500,000 confirmed cases. If this is truly 20% of the cases then we can assume that the true number of cases(symptomatic and a-symptomatic) is around 7,500,000. Personally I think the number is higher but that’s another story. The US currently reports roughly 91,000 deaths and seeing as though death isn’t a-symptomatic let’s assume that this is the correct value....which I also doubt again. 91,000 deaths in a total of 7,500,000 yields a mortality rate of 1.21%. Now what does that mean? It means this is all a bunch of bull crap and shit needs to open up again. The virus is shit and their numbers are shit.
actually way lower when they release the real numbers of antibody testing
and they stop including flu, pneumonia, heart disease, cancers etc
source for these numbers?
The person who posted this originally got their statistics using the United States Census Bureau estimated the U.S. population in 2019 to be 328,239,523. And when you do the math based on that, about 99.975% of the population has not died of COVID-19 as of yet. Link: https://www.census.gov/en.html. However, if you also add the estimated illegal immigrants then you get to 99.983%
I stopped reading after the text with the link
While that's nice and all, it needs a source.
Quick, burn the Constitution!
You have a better chance of dying from Hillary than she has of being POTUS.
If I had know the survival rate was going to be so low I would have worn a mask to the store last week. Sorry guys, my bad.
This is good, but if we could get a more expanded screenshot with more statistics (with as-of dates) we can paste to non-believers, I think that would be quite helpful to get the word out. "Don't believe me, here's the numbers, along with sources?" Pointing to the census is good, but they'll never check it unless we piecemeal it first.
With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people?
Chinese Virus - Hold my Beer.
It'd be even higher if NY Gov Cuomo (D) hadn't banned hydroxychloroquine or forced infected patients into nursing homes.
We must lockdown all genitals until the conception curve is flattened! -drooling wojacks
now do rates if healthy and under 60!
So nations with older populations don't do as well. The more multi-cultural the worse the numbers get.
And this is with them screwing with the numbers.
Jesus fucking Christ. What the fuck have they done?
We have the best survivors, folks!
That's still millions of people worldwide