Doug64 wrote:One question that the overall numbers don't answer is how many of those excess deaths are due to the Wuhan virus, and how many are due to people not having access to medical services or are afraid to access them.
You are right that direct attribution is not possible. It's more of an indicator of the effects of the pandemic as a whole, although one can tease out additional information, as has been done for the UK (e.g. see my post here
if you are interested).
Doug64 wrote:The numbers I've seen from admittedly not-exactly-rigorous-or-universal studies in the US ran from 50% asymptomatic to as high as 98%. Of course the latter was in a prison where the population would be (very) disproportionately younger and healthier, which is where the less-than-univseral part comes in....
Some of the discrepancy could be down to the type of test used. PCR tests will catch people who have just been infected and might be pre-symptomatic whereas antibody tests will catch them some time into their illness when they are more likely to be really asymptomatic.
That said, I've read about the result from antibody tests in the UK today which had a higher percentage of asymptomatic people, so who knows?
Edit: National Review has this on the CDC data:
I don’t have a scorching hot take on the number. But I do want to know where it comes from, which is not clear from the site itself. It says the information is based on data about a month old and names the source “Preliminary COVID-19 estimates, CDC,” which I have not been able to locate (if indeed it refers to a specific document at all).
I have contacted the CDC several times in the past week to no avail. Both the Center for Public Integrity and BuzzFeed similarly report that they sought comment and received no reply.
If the fatality rate of this thing is 0.26 percent, that is fantastic news. If the CDC has evidence this is the case, it should share it with the rest of us.