Originally Posted by
Stick Flying
I guess some guesses are better than others. There have, since the start of the pandemic, been random test samples done which could be extrapolated to approximate the level of debilitation for a given sample range. The latest figures I read (from a British medical journal publication) were IFR figures varying from 0.37-1.45% (depending on geographical demographics). So you are right, these numbers are guesses (I'd say a statistical estimation would be a better term). So to come up with 4% then a revised 3.1% is a considerably worse guess, almost alarming. My whole beef is why quote a percentage which is of little relevance and considerably more than the better guesses. I have read an article that suggests Covid could be 6 times as deadly Influenza. But these are all generalisations as the widespread data collection for Flu hasn't needed the resources that Covid-19 see's us experiencing today.
But food for thought is required. There is no doubt in my mind that Covid-19 couldn't carry on unchecked. But when making comparisons, Influenza has had centuries of experience to draw upon on making decisions how to treat flu sufferers. We have vaccines for the flu (although it is a lottery to which variant is in the offing). Yet people still die from it. Where Covid ends up in the 'Viral hall of shame' will be determined in a few years. But we are just going to have to learn to live with it.
Well thanks for keeping your argument within logical limits but I will point out one (last) time, the 3.1% is not a guess. It is the statistical value from recorded data in Australia for confirmed Covid cases.
The 4% was just bad rounding and was never intended to be dissected as if it was from published dissertation.