 |
|
I'm not sure where you got that number, I was using the more
Posted on: November 27, 2020 at 11:35:21 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
72858
Member For:
21.60 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
conservative .23%.
Tigermatt said the CDC had a .2% IFR
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=17272419
The CDC tends to bury their overall estimate in their papers, though I remember seeing one a couple of months or so back that came in at .26%, but they adjusted it to .23% to account for the higher ages of the sample they had analyzed.
Fatality rates have been dropping, of course, as the doctors and hospitals learn which procedures, protocols and drugs are most effective and as ramped up testing is getting sick people into the hospitals sooner than was the case not so long ago.
The most recent CDC stats on the infection fatality rate were broken down by age brackets. They didn't give one for the overall population, probably because of the huge variance between the age brackets.
In general, although the deaths are heavily skewed toward the elderly age brackets, the number of infections is likely to be heavily skewed to the younger age brackets.
Younger people are far less worried about it on average, other than the delusional liberals, of course, and are out and about and not as worried about locking themselves in their homes or social distancing.
The elderly and those with significant health conditions are self-quarantining or taking far more precautions.
Therefore, I think the number of infections may well be under estimated in this instance.
Tigermatt said the CDC had a .2% IFR
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/view.php?message=17272419
The CDC tends to bury their overall estimate in their papers, though I remember seeing one a couple of months or so back that came in at .26%, but they adjusted it to .23% to account for the higher ages of the sample they had analyzed.
Fatality rates have been dropping, of course, as the doctors and hospitals learn which procedures, protocols and drugs are most effective and as ramped up testing is getting sick people into the hospitals sooner than was the case not so long ago.
The most recent CDC stats on the infection fatality rate were broken down by age brackets. They didn't give one for the overall population, probably because of the huge variance between the age brackets.
In general, although the deaths are heavily skewed toward the elderly age brackets, the number of infections is likely to be heavily skewed to the younger age brackets.
Younger people are far less worried about it on average, other than the delusional liberals, of course, and are out and about and not as worried about locking themselves in their homes or social distancing.
The elderly and those with significant health conditions are self-quarantining or taking far more precautions.
Therefore, I think the number of infections may well be under estimated in this instance.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
I'm not sure where you got that number, I was using the more - JeffB MU - 11/27 11:35:21