Okay, so every now and then I like to throw out ideas or arguments in front of a large group of people who can poke holes in them.
I'd like to get you guys to poke some holes in the following analysis, please. That is to say: If it's wrong, help me find out all the ways it's wrong.
The data comes from a BBC television news broadcast posted on YouTube 3 hours ago (as I type this, 9:27 p.m. EST). It gives the following figures for deaths and recoveries from coronavirus:
TOTAL KNOWN CASES THUS FAR: 101,781
CASES RESOLVED BY DYING: 3,460
CASES RESOLVED BY RECOVERY: 55,866
TOTAL RESOLVED (either died or recovered): 59,326 ( = 55,866 + 3,460 )
TOTAL CASES AS-YET UNRESOLVED (still sick): 42,455
Let's presume what is probably NOT true; namely, that the 101,781 cases currently known are ALL the cases that actually exist.
Given that presumption,
and given that 3460/59326 = 0.058322,
isn't it correct to say that,
IF a person (age, country, state-of-health, and treatment-quality unknown) contracts COVID-19,
THEN he has about a 5.8322% chance -- better than 1 in 20 -- of dying from it?
That is to say: We shouldn't be measuring the dead as a percentage of total cases, but as a percentage of resolved cases; that is, cases whose final outcome is already known.
Of the cases whose outcome is NOT already known, our best guess is that their outcomes will follow similar percentages IF their age, country, state-of-health, and treatment-quality is similar to that of the already-resolved group.
(Fortunately, now that we're learning about the virus, treatment-quality will turn out to be much better in many cases.)
Okay, done. That's the analysis. I'm not wedded to it; I just want a lot of input to improve it.
So, feel free to poke holes in it, now.
Oh, but...please poke useful holes; i.e., things not already stated/implied above. For example, please don't say, "Actually, there are probably many cases not recognized as COVID-19" ...since I already said as much. (However, if you have some way to estimate how many unrecognized cases there are, and how much that would change the outcome percentages, THAT would be useful information!)