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.
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.