Calculating The Actual Fatality Rate

[AsherO]

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/

Based on excess deaths and seroprevalence in NYC they are now saying IFR of 1.4% (somewhere between 27x-55x as deadly as the seasonal flu). Finally getting more accurate numbers, down from estimates of 3%.

Seroprevalence is overstated if some infected people never develop antibodies (or too low antibody count to be considered positive for antibodies). Meaning the actual fatality rate might even be lower.

[PlatinumGuy]

Seroprevalence is overstated if some infected people never develop antibodies (or too low antibody count to be considered positive for antibodies).

99% of patients diagnosed by PCR or CT have antibodies.

[Euclid]

99% of patients diagnosed by PCR or CT have antibodies.

Source?

(Anecdotally, I know 3 people who had positive PCR tests and negative antibody tests.)

[PlatinumGuy]

Source?

(Anecdotally, I know 3 people who had positive PCR tests and negative antibody tests.)

They didn't wait long enough.

[Euclid]

They didn't wait long enough.

One was a 5 week gap, another 7 weeks, third unknown.

[PlatinumGuy]

Bad antibodies test then

[Euclid]

Bad antibodies test then

Definitely possible. Was just a DP. Do you have a source for your 99%, or is it a guesstimate?

[AsherO]

Definitely possible. Was just a DP. Do you have a source for your 99%, or is it a guesstimate?

Maybe he’s referring to the accuracy of certain antibody tests, but that would be an error on his part. Just because a test is accurate at confirming presence of antibodies, doesn’t mean 99% of those to have confirmed infections have them.

[PlatinumGuy]

Maybe he’s referring to the accuracy of certain antibody tests, but that would be an error on his part. Just because a test is accurate at confirming presence of antibodies, doesn’t mean 99% of those to have confirmed infections have them.

No, all studies show 99%+ of infected patients have antibodies. I don't have patience to search for them but here's one

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/05/07/study-finds-nearly-everyone-who-recovers-from-covid-19-makes-coronavirus-antibodies/


Granted, the studies are depending on PCR or CT to diagnose infection, so you can always claim people have it and it goes completely under the radar, but it's extremely hard to believe they would develop immunity under such circumstances.

[AsherO]

No, all studies show 99%+ of infected patients have antibodies. I don't have patience to search for them but here's one

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/05/07/study-finds-nearly-everyone-who-recovers-from-covid-19-makes-coronavirus-antibodies/


Granted, the studies are depending on PCR or CT to diagnose infection, so you can always claim people have it and it goes completely under the radar, but it's extremely hard to believe they would develop immunity under such circumstances.

So 0% of those with mild symptoms or those who otherwise didn’t get a PCR/CT test had a COVID infection and it was always something else? Testing would have some correlation to severity of symptoms, and if the severity of infection (the mythical viral load?) correlates to antibody levels, then maybe some (more than 1%) of the mildest infections end up testing negative for antibodies?

[PlatinumGuy]

So 0% of those with mild symptoms or those who otherwise didn’t get a PCR/CT test had a COVID infection and it was always something else?

Not sure I understand, but in general they reference against old samples pre Covid, so we know they weren't asymptomatic Covid carriers.

Testing would have some correlation to severity of symptoms, and if the severity of infection (the mythical viral load?) correlates to antibody levels, then maybe some (more than 1%) of the mildest infections end up testing negative for antibodies?

It's always possible hypothetically, but we do know close to 100% of known covid carriers develop antibodies.

Granted, the studies are depending on PCR or CT to diagnose infection, so you can always claim people have it and it goes completely under the radar, but it's extremely hard to believe they would develop immunity under such circumstances.

If you were infected, but it doesn't show up on PCR or CT, and doesn't create antibodies, did you really have it?

[Lurker]

https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/06/nj-reports-probable-coronavirus-deaths-for-1st-time-death-toll-now-at-14872-with-170k-total-positive-tests.html

[Kobe Bryant]

What some of us have been saying since March
Coronavirus: US cases ‘may have topped 20 million’

[PlatinumGuy]

What some of us have been saying since March
Coronavirus: US cases ‘may have topped 20 million’

Before it happened.
Anyhow everybody agrees the mortality rate is 0.5-1%, so 120k deaths is 12-24M infections.

[S209]

What some of us have been saying since March
Coronavirus: US cases ‘may have topped 20 million’

-1

You can have been saying it since 2010 and you’d still have been wrong. It wasn’t true then. It’s true now.

[Kobe Bryant]

Before it happened.
Anyhow everybody agrees the mortality rate is 0.5-1%, so 120k deaths is 12-24M infections.

In March?

-1

You can have been saying it since 2010 and you’d still have been wrong. It wasn’t true then. It’s true now.

Obviously I am referring to the actual infection rate being 10X the reported cases.