It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# The CFR for Covid19 is unknown at this point .

page: 3
8
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 03:21 AM

Google coronavirus death rate then pick 8 or 10 random pages.

You’ll get at least four or five different figures . ( conjecture but I’m pretty sure it’s fairly accurate )

Which brings us back by another angle to the same place most of us are in agreement on .

Nobody has a firm grasp on any of the numbers with the exception of deaths and you can calculate reliable statistics with only one variable .

But I’ll be watching with smug Indifference as math forces the MSM to finally be honest after 3 1/2 years .

posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 03:21 AM

Google coronavirus death rate then pick 8 or 10 random pages.

You’ll get at least four or five different figures . ( conjecture but I’m pretty sure it’s fairly accurate )

Which brings us back by another angle to the same place most of us are in agreement on .

Nobody has a firm grasp on any of the numbers with the exception of deaths . You can’t calculate reliable statistics with only one variable .

But I’ll be watching with smug Indifference as math forces the MSM to finally be honest after 3 1/2 years .
edit on 15-3-2020 by Fallingdown because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2020 @ 08:14 AM

originally posted by: Phage

Statistical analysis accounts for such discrepancies but, in general, the greater the numbers over larger geographical areas, the more accurate they become.

Right. I know people dont like to use China's numbers. But hear me out. 88% of China's cases have had an outcome. Only 12% are still infected. China's mortality rate is 4%. People argue that China is skewing their numbers and that's plausible.

But let's look at it like this. If China were to skew their numbers doesnt it stand to reason that they would skew them lower, not higher to save face? If their skewed mortality rate is 4% then that means the actual mortality rate is even higher.

Remember almost all of their cases have had an outcome so if they are in fact reporting correctly then this would be our most accurate mortality rate because of sample size and percentage of outcomes.

What do you think?

posted on Mar, 16 2020 @ 08:21 PM

I'd say you're spot on there based on latest figures.
According to the released figures, China now has known outcomes for close to 90% of their confirmed cases and the mortality rate is currently about 4.5% (and dropping) of the known outcomes. IE the China figure is the best indicator for the time being.

The rest of the world is the other way round atm with only 10% of confirmed cases having a known outcome so any stats based on those numbers are all over the place and basically useless for making any predictions.

posted on Mar, 17 2020 @ 05:10 AM

originally posted by: Pilgrum

I'd say you're spot on there based on latest figures.
According to the released figures, China now has known outcomes for close to 90% of their confirmed cases and the mortality rate is currently about 4.5% (and dropping) of the known outcomes. IE the China figure is the best indicator for the time being.

The rest of the world is the other way round atm with only 10% of confirmed cases having a known outcome so any stats based on those numbers are all over the place and basically useless for making any predictions.

Thank you, FINALLY someone gets it. You are very smart!

new topics

top topics

8