WHO, Coronavirus has killed 3.4% of people

3.4% ....higher than they previously thought

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/03/coronavirus-live-updates/#link-FZWCUE6QH5AVLCAB2UUN4BHBQM

Other sources

World health officials said Tuesday the case fatality rate for COVID-19 is 3.4% globally, higher than previous estimates of about 2%.

“Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said during a press briefing at the agency’s headquarters in Geneva. In comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected, he said.

The World Health Organization had said last week that the mortality rate of COVID-19 can differ, ranging from 0.7% to up to 4%, depending on the quality of the health-care system where it’s treated. Early in the outbreak, scientists had concluded the death rate was around 2.3%.

During a press briefing Monday, WHO officials said they don’t know how COVID-19 behaves, saying it’s not like influenza. They added that while much is known about the seasonal flu, such as how it’s transmitted and what treatments work to suppress the disease, that same information is still in question when it comes to the coronavirus.

“This is a unique virus, with unique features. This virus is not influenza,” Tedros said Monday. “We are in uncharted territory.”

Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO’s health emergencies program, said Monday that the coronavirus isn’t transmitting the same exact way as the flu and health officials have been given a “glimmer, a chink of light” that the virus could be contained. 

“Here we have a disease for which we have no vaccine, no treatment, we don’t fully understand transmission, we don’t fully understand case mortality, but what we have been genuinely heartened by is that unlike influenza, where countries have fought back, where they’ve put in place strong measures, we’ve remarkably seen that the virus is suppressed,” Ryan said

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/03/who-says-coronavirus-death-rate-is-3point4percent-globally-higher-than-previously-thought.html

It makes sense that people who have full hospital support survive. 

4% is mental. 1 in 25 people!

I think its overblown but I'll keep researching. I suspect we aren't being told the truth about the numbers.

My wife had an excellent discussion today with her doctor. Here are the takeaways:

-Based on discussions with his colleagues in Washington State a mild case is like the worst cold you have ever had.

-Due to a bad flu season there are no beds available now in Seattle or surrounding states.

Yes, I have the WHO figures [up to 3rd March 2020] and this comes in at 3.43% CFR. China is at 3.67%. and the USA is at 3.13%, Italy is lower at 2.55%.

However, The Diamond Princess is only at 0.88%, and South Korea at 0.58%.

My personal take on this is that the CFR is inflated because so few people are being tested.  If the 80% of mild cases are being missed in most countries then the Infection Fatality Rate (ie the true rate, not just those tested) drops to around 0.7%.   This is still much higher than the estimated flu rates but not by as much as the first data that came out of China suggested.  

Time, and better trained people, will give you a better answer.  

EdwinSm, wrote: Yes, I have the WHO figures [up to 3rd March 2020] and this comes in at 3.43% CFR. China is at 3.67%. and the USA is at 3.13%, Italy is lower at 2.55%. However, The Diamond Princess is only at 0.88%, and South Korea at 0.58%. My personal take on this is that the CFR is inflated because so few people are being tested.  If the 80% of mild cases are being missed in most countries then the Infection Fatality Rate (ie the true rate, not just those tested) drops to around 0.7%.   This is still much higher than the estimated flu rates but not by as much as the first data that came out of China suggested.   Time, and better trained people, will give you a better answer.

I agree. At this point, I'm sure a significant number of mild cases are going under the radar. Not trying to downplay this one (I am the guy that was climbing up the shelves in my local Ralphs an hour ago to get the last two packs of sanitizing wipes), but if we learned nothing else from previous outbreaks/pandemics, we should at least know that initial numbers usually don't tell the whole story. 2009 H1N1's CFR was still being debated a couple of years later.

Also, in case anyone is feeling like panicking over the WHO figures, you need to take into account the spread in any community.  If the IFR is 4%, but only 60% get sick then the chance of dying is 2.4%, and it will be lower if you Social Distance (as you have less chance of picking up the virus).  

One important question  here is "just how many people will get infected?".  This will change the estimates for the likely number of deaths.

By comparison, the CDC's estimate for this season's flu is that just under 10% of people in the USA have become infected.  Of these 1% have been hospitalised, and the IFR is estimated at 0,056% [data up to 22nd February 2020]

I agree. I have already been thinking, the CFR should be divided into 2 (or 3 categories) based on age and then sub categorized into pre-existing risk factors. Then hopefully those at a lesser risk persons can be prepared to help those in a higher risk. Averaging it keeps the calm.

 I’ve been worried about pregnant women as well, in 1918-1919 there was a drop in birth rates as it was suspected many pregnancies miscarried if first trimester. I went out in a limb and told women in my family in the childbearing stage of life. Please hold off on pregnancy for 9 more months until better data comes out, citing the 1918 data. 

Now we all can breathe a sigh of relief and sleep like babies tonite.....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/03/04/coronavirus-live-updates/#link-AUVG57DUBNDG7E2YE72DWG43RM

Trump disputes coronavirus mortality rate based on his ‘hunch’

I didn't even try to paste, I have had no luck at all. Thanks