Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

blitzen

(4,572 posts)

6. Yes, I think the official case numbers are way low (lack of testing, etc.), and so the CFR will...

Reply to The_jackalope (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 3, 2020, 03:02 PM

Apr 2020

ultimately be lower (maybe a lot lower). The site that I look at a lot (link below) has the CFR at 6%. I would imagine that the deaths number is somewhere in the ballpark, but the total cases number is probably way too low.

What scares me about the Lancet data is the fatality rates for the older age groups: 4% for age 60-64, 8.6% for 70-74, 13.4% for 80+

https://ncov2019.live/data

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Big numbers [View all] The_jackalope Apr 2020 OP

I would say you are very good at this. I actually can understand it and that is saying something. monmouth4 Apr 2020 #1

Thanks! nt The_jackalope Apr 2020 #4

This study in Lancet has the CFR at 1.38 percent. And I would bet that goes down with more data. blitzen Apr 2020 #2

I have no doubt the Lancet has way better statisticians than me. The_jackalope Apr 2020 #3

Yes, I think the official case numbers are way low (lack of testing, etc.), and so the CFR will... blitzen Apr 2020 #6

The site I use has the CFR for closed cases at 20% The_jackalope Apr 2020 #7

I disagree as a high number of people died of CFR and were not counted IMHO. We know this happened Demsrule86 Apr 2020 #5