People saying we should, by next week, open up economy regardless of where we are with the disease have to come to grips with the numbers we really are talking about.
First...I am going to use conservative numbers here, and presume that about 50% of the public gets sick.
First...I am going to use conservative numbers here, and presume that about 50% of the public gets sick.
In reality, 80% or more infection rate is actually likely, but I want to be reserved and give a best case scenario with that option. Also, this is back of the letter numbers...
So, we are talking about 170 million Americans by that estimate, will get ill/infected.
So, we are talking about 170 million Americans by that estimate, will get ill/infected.
Given that...
Taking data from across the globe, the mortality rate from the disease is anywhere from 1-2%. Conservatively, and for ease of math, take 1%.
So that means that about 1.7 million Americans would die in that scenario, and in short order because no mitigation.
Taking data from across the globe, the mortality rate from the disease is anywhere from 1-2%. Conservatively, and for ease of math, take 1%.
So that means that about 1.7 million Americans would die in that scenario, and in short order because no mitigation.
Approximate data shows that of the infected, 6% were aged ≥85, 25% were aged 65–84 years, 18% each were aged 55–64 years and 45–54 years, and 29% were aged 20–44 years.
Pretty consistently, 80% of the deaths are among those over age 65.
That gives us 1.36 million elderly Americans would die.
With approximately 50 million over that age...that means almost 3% of our elderly population would perish.
That gives us 1.36 million elderly Americans would die.
With approximately 50 million over that age...that means almost 3% of our elderly population would perish.
Now, that still leaves us with 20% of fatalities that occur UNDER the age of 65.
Which means 340,000 Americans of working age would die.
And not die over a five year period; die within a few short months.
Which means 340,000 Americans of working age would die.
And not die over a five year period; die within a few short months.
Among those middle aged (45-64), the death rate was approximately 0.4%.
These patients would account for about 250,000 of those deaths.
These patients would account for about 250,000 of those deaths.
Age 25-44 would account for much of the remainder, about 80,000 deaths.
Those under 25 definitely are less impacted...but even among them, we are seeing fatality rate equivalent to influenza...so almost 10,000 would die nationwide.
Those under 25 definitely are less impacted...but even among them, we are seeing fatality rate equivalent to influenza...so almost 10,000 would die nationwide.
In short, among those under age 25...more would die in a few short months...than died in the weeks after the D-day invasion.
Or, about 4 times worse than 9/11.
Or, about 4 times worse than 9/11.
Again, these are CONSERVATIVE numbers. My guess is it would be far worse, as the health care system was flooded and imploded.
But even these conservative numbers should give you pause.
But even these conservative numbers should give you pause.
I'd be happy to hear revisions on this (not upward, because I know things could be worse) but general numbers and why my numbers are right/wrong, and how we could extrapolate better.
Again, this was my quick back of the envelope job, and even that is scary.
Again, this was my quick back of the envelope job, and even that is scary.
One other point: People are already saying "What if we begin testing and monitoring!"
Well, sure. But if you do that, you are, by definition, moving away from the mitigation phase and to the suppression phase. That is a DIFFERENT argument. I am all for that.
Well, sure. But if you do that, you are, by definition, moving away from the mitigation phase and to the suppression phase. That is a DIFFERENT argument. I am all for that.
Same message here.
