Death rate 10%?

>math isn't how math works
>believing numbers pulled out a bureaucrats ass is how math works
>this faggot actually believes the sugar coated bullshit from the authorities
We have a sample size of 90k concluded cases of the virus and the death rate among those concluded is nearly 10%.

Your naive bullshit calculations assume that every single active case will end with a recovery. It assumes that every single unreported case ends in a recovery.

The only real math is using the concrete data that we have which is currently around 9% point something death rate for concluded cases. 90k cases is a big enough sample for this to be an accurate representation of the outcome for unconcluded and non-reported cases.

The number of infected is much much much higher. There are plenty of people not being tested, thus this number is not adequate.

Corona is a meme at this point

You know theres so many people that get nothing or just a light cold or regular like flu from this but never go to the doctor. So the true rate is well lower since they are never tested.

80% of people who have don't feel sick at all. if you don't feel sick you don't go to the doctor and get tested. the infected number we see right now is only 20% of the real number. with that in mind you could say the recovered number is only 20% of the real number too.
calculate that into your equation.

Big retard energy!!!!!
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

I was not explaining how they get their numbers, only why using rate of recovered/dead to determine death rate is inaccurate.

Attached: 1584491952426.jpg (1024x762, 143.72K)

>full denial of how bat things really are

This, heard from many that this has most likely been spreading communally for several months now. Wouldn’t be surprised if hundreds of thousands have had it and didn’t know.

it takes longer to finish a race than it does to total your vehicle on the first turn

but if 100 cars are racing, 10 crash and 30 reach the finish line, we don't close the book and say "only 10% of cars crash" because 60 cars are still on the fucking track waiting to be a data point, and so far it's been proven that closer to 25% of cars fail to survive until the end

so was i
except you explantion was tangential to what myself and OP are getting at

You say that but would you be ok if you were one of the people it kills? Nope, you're just a dirty little hypocrite bitch. Start with yourself coward.

>Or am I being retarded?
Yes, there are always more factors in play, but you haven't even considered the most basic one: time. It's not like you can only die or recover at a single randomly determined instant, you can die, or stay infected and recover later, or recover sooner. Also the virus is not the real problem this world is going to face.

the only case i know of where everybody was tested (healthy people too) was the cruiseship thing. it had shown that 80% of people who have the virus don't show any symptoms.
because of this we can assume that the official infected numbers are only 20% of the real ones. do your research idiot.

then there should be a huge scandal in every country that isn't testing healthy people to track the spread

Probably much lower than that. A study came out saying that 87% of cases go unreported. If people have mild symptoms and recover on their own they're not going to show up in the data.

based
you have to go back

Ching chong working hard for CCP I see

see the numbers shown on TV are only the reported cases, keep that always in mind.

Why are Europeans so quick to bend over backwards for "academics" and "intellectuals". You people are such fucking pussy ass losers that you can't even look at simple data to draw conclusions yourself. You rely on math scholars to tell you 2+2=4. If some random Joe said the sky is blue, you would ask "do you have a university degree in the weather?". God you fucking fags are so pretentious, I hate it. Fuck off.

>Mutts
The death rate is 0.01% in Germany you retard, are they CCP shills too?

Well I dont trust Chinas numbers so much so I made this.

Attached: 20200318_101723.jpg (1080x1506, 305.85K)

Bruh In Italy and the US the Death Rate of cases with a result (Either recovered or dead) is around 50%

Attached: Screenshot_20200318-071946~2.png (644x1217, 55.79K)

Attached: Screenshot_20200318-071959~2.png (999x635, 44.84K)

Yeah but also there also could be alot of people who have it but are mostly fine and staying home so it's not being reported as well as recovered I hope lol

RECOVERED IS JUST FROM CRITICAL

some people die quickly

takes a long time to fully "recover"

exponential growth means lots of new cases

I still think the rate we'll see if more people get tested would be around 10% or whatever the elderly population is

The recovery rate is much slower than the death rate. To fully recover from it, could take 2-4 weeks because of the rigorous requirements to be considered "recovered" (i.e. in Cucknada it is 2 negative tests 24 hours apart). But if you die from it, you're probably gone within a week of symptoms. So the death rate is probably 4x the pace of recovery rate.

This is the only stats that should count, remove china and we are fuckt 37% is real. Why else stop the world for 3-4%

Attached: C1F6B998-94DE-4622-AE9B-77FE8123C4A2.jpg (645x480, 49.59K)

All this, just because some slant eyed goblin wanted to taste bat anus.

This is bull.

Find me any source that says recovered is from critical and I'll change mind

This Virus might actually be a good thing. It will strengthen the family unit. And in the event that the world turn's to anarchy feminism will be a thing of the past

They keep talking about how "people are unknowingly transmitting this to everyone and showing no symptoms," yet here we are throwing out these numbers that don't reflect that population. If it is really spreading this fast, that is only possible if there are a large number of infectious carriers.
It is likely a portion of the population has already been infected. No real numbers on recovered from earlier months back, and that another portion is currently ill or recovering, but not being tested.

That is a brita let comparison. The only way your example makes sense when used to compare to this, is if the “first turn” is inherently more dangerous and crash prone.

“I DON’T CARE THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVEN’T RECOVERED AREN’T CRITICAL AND SRE BARELY RUNNING A FEVER, THE DEATH RATE RIGHT NOW IS 6 GORILLION %”

Stop this nigger panic bullshit. This is already the biggest happening in 30 years at 2-3% we don’t need your faggot irrational nonsense to make it “more happening”

Because it is incomplete data, and also tends to be skewed to high than reality due to the nature of dying faster than recovering. Basically your recovered/dead % means nothing until more time has gone by.

Mortality for closed cases Al ways rises when the virus is active in a zone where boomers still didn't got infected, they are the ones who get sick first and worst and also die first, with time it always goes low because you have more detected in the age range of 25-49 years old who can of course also die but it's less common

Bruh even the no/low symptom people recover but it would seem that around 50% of people who test positive end up dying

Attached: Screenshot_20200318-071959~3.png (999x545, 44.03K)

The actual mortality of the virus is closer to Korea/Germany than anywhere else, you have to use a country that is testing a lot but also isn't overrun and has a working healthcare system, otherwise you'll end up counting indirect virus deaths (example, a leukemia patient who didn't got a bed in a collapsed hospital full of corona)

Its 10 percent for hospitalized cases. There are much more people infected than what is reported

Open cases shouldn't be added to the ratio; it's deceptive.
Open cases are automatically 100% alive rate, because they are open. Closed case actually has an outcome of recover or dead, which makes it more reliable.

Also, something to think about is italy and united states both have around a 50% death ratio if you count only closed cases...

They'll definately lower eventually though....
Either way anything over a 2% means it's stronger than spanish-flu and is catastrophic.

Over a long enough time scale, this would be a okay way to calculate it. However, people can die very quickly but it takes quite a while for them to be deemed recovered. This means the death count is front loaded and will be high relative to the recovered count early on for the same set of cases, but as time goes on more people than die in that set will recover because the people who were going to die have already done so early on.

It's 50% of cases that recover or die
Numbers from Italy similar % in US

Can you teach me Danish math, i'm using the Swedish one right one and it's telling me it's 10%.

Attached: danish math.png (670x505, 22.33K)

It is more complicated than that. If the outbreak was over and all outcomes known, your math would be correct. To get a real figure you have to grab a snapshot sample from a time when all the infected people have now either died or recovered. Not an easy task, and the numbers being floated are estimates.

How would they know or test that assertion at all until a retrospective study utilizing an antibody test can be done?

They can't it is just modeling. We don't have a antibody test. Testing is limited and this is just a SWAG (scientific wild ass guess). I don't think the death rate is 10% or apocalyptic but the point is it is a known unknown.

>bro you have corona are you going to be ok
> ya bro I'm not going to die nor recover, I'm just gonna be eternally infected

it's disturbing how low the number of "recovered" is relative to "active" cases. Are people really laid up with this for weeks and weeks at a time? What a shitshow.

This is all just a guess until a quality retrospective antibody test can be run. You test a random sample across the population to see who has antibodies and compare that to a ratio of confirmed tests. We do the same for every flu season.

No, most people simply don't recover but stay infected for months until they finally die

Why did you compare between recovered and dead? Both are outcomes. You need to compare with some sort of sample size to determine probability.

It's already over, the news media just milking this at this point

Attached: Screenshot_20200318-080103_Instagram.jpg (1440x1647, 701.04K)