nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The maths of it all and what it means to Ireland

ShineOn7

Let’s round up the Republic’s population to 5 million, it’s only 100,000 shy of this number

The amount of people expected to get it (whether they show symptoms or not) is anything from 30% to 70%, depending on the source you read. Huge differences there but let’s say 50% because it’s somewhere in between

That’s 2.5 million who’ll get it (remember; not all will show symptoms)

Reported mortality rates on this have been 0.5 to 2%. It’s just too early to tell

Let’s be optimistic and say 1%

1% of 2.5 million is 25,000 Irish fatalities in the Republic

This is more than double how many the HSE worker doing the Ask Me Anything thinks in his Best Case Scenario. He mentioned 10,000 people in this instance

So hopefully he’s actually right in this case and it’s “only” 10,000

For this to happen;

- The amount of carriers of this will have to be much lower than 50%, and

- mortality rate would need to be closer to 0.5%

How does 10,000 compare to a normal 12 months in Ireland when you combine the pneumonia and flu fatalities?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on the maths of it all and what it means to Ireland

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ELM327

Blut2 wrote: »

You can absolutely compare raw numbers throw subtraction. Someone aged 50-65 catching covid has a .08% higher chance of death than their peer catching flu. The numbers don't lie.

The chart is IFR, not CFR.

You're mixing up percent with percentage points

Thats me

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Almost a third of cases in Ireland aged 0-54 end up in ICU?

Doesn't sound right

Almost a third of ICU admissions.

ShineOn7

Thats me wrote: »

Almost a third of ICU admissions.

That still sounds very high

Last I worked out, if you're under 45 you've a roughly 5% chance of ending up in hospital if you get it in Ireland

Thats me

ShineOn7 wrote: »

That still sounds very high

Last I worked out, if you're under 45 you've a roughly 5% chance of ending up in hospital if you get it in Ireland

If any doubts please feel free to check my calculations yourself.

[Deleted User]

Blut2 wrote: »

You can absolutely compare raw numbers throw subtraction. Someone aged 50-65 catching covid has a .08% higher chance of death than their peer catching flu. The numbers don't lie.

The chart is IFR, not CFR.

No, they are 2.33 times more likely to die or 233%

2ndcoming

ShineOn7 wrote: »

That still sounds very high

Last I worked out, if you're under 45 you've a roughly 5% chance of ending up in hospital if you get it in Ireland

Look at it this way, barely any (if any) over 80 will be put in an ICU, they will either die or recover where they are, so 2/3 ICU admissions have been in the 54-79 age bracket. There have also been far more 0-54 cases than any other cohort.

ShineOn7

What is the current CFR for Covid in Ireland?

In April it was insanely high if I'm remembering right. Like 6%, so 60 mortalaties for every thousand cases

SchrodingersCat

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What is the current CFR for Covid in Ireland?

In April it was insanely high if I'm remembering right. Like 6%, so 60 mortalaties for every thousand cases

We are about 2.8% in Ireland right now

Yep, it was about 6-7% back in April.

ShineOn7

SchrodingersCat wrote: »

We are about 2.8% in Ireland right now

That's CFR and not the positivity rate right?

Just checking

ShineOn7

Someone on Reddit Ireland has run some scary projections

The seven day average is continuing to increase by an average of just above 11% day (for the fifth day in a row)

If that keeps going we'll see above 2,000 cases in 4 days and if it continued further until the 3rd of January we'd see 3,000 cases, assuming we don't hit the limits of our testing by that point.

mike8634

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Someone on Reddit Ireland has run some scary projections

Positivity is pretty stable at 5%?

2,000 cases needs 40,000 tests

3,000 cases needs 60,000 tests

Not gonna happen imo

Would be shocked if it did, shocked

We would need nearly 10% positivity to get those numbers

[Deleted User]

mike8634 wrote: »

Positivity is pretty stable at 5%?

2,000 cases needs 40,000 tests

3,000 cases needs 60,000 tests

Not gonna happen imo

Would be shocked if it did, shocked

We would need nearly 10% positivity to get those numbers

That’s not true. The positive rate has doubled in less than 2 weeks.

Cases result in cases not tests

mike8634

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That’s not true. The positive rate has doubled in less than 2 weeks.

Cases result in cases not tests

Like I said 10%

Its 5%

Will it hit 10%?

Not a chance

mandrake04

mike8634 wrote: »

Like I said 10%

Its 5%

Will it hit 10%?

Not a chance

Was over 7% in October was it not? and the October numbers looked tame compared to now.

ShineOn7

What do the Maths heads make of this? A report by WHO in October says the IFR is now at 0.23%

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

It seems to get lower and lower every month. I remember back in March some estimates had it at 3%!

So if it's at 0.23% now that makes it "only" 2.3 times more fatal than the Flu?

normanoffside

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What do the Maths heads make of this? A report by WHO in October says the IFR is now at 0.23%

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

It seems to get lower and lower every month. I remember back in March some estimates had it at 3%!

So if it's at 0.23% now that makes it "only" 2.3 times more fatal than the Flu?

The Overall IFR will depend on the demographics of the population. The older the population, the higher the IFR. A country with an old population (e.g. Italy) will have a lot higher IFR than that a young country (e.g. Many African countries where people rarely live above 65).
They'd be better off doing stats on the IFR in the various age groups.

ShineOn7

normanoffside wrote: »

The Overall IFR will depend on the demographics of the population.

Agreed

I think this 0.23% estimate by WHO is based on the average of the data they have worldwide

mike8634

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Agreed

I think this 0.23% estimate by WHO is based on the average of the data they have worldwide

US has had 42% of its country infected then with that IFR

Blut2

mike8634 wrote: »

US has had 42% of its country infected then with that IFR

Obesity (apart from age) seems to be the #1 factor in likelihood of death. The US leads in the world in that, so will probably end up with a significantly higher IFR than most countries.

Their infection rate probably isn't as high as 42%, but its definitely much much higher than their total confirmed tests, on top of that. Its been let run rampant in most of the country since May.

ceadaoin.

normanoffside wrote: »

They'd be better off doing stats on the IFR in the various age groups.

The CDC did that in September. At that time their current best estimates were:

0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

bb1234567

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What do the Maths heads make of this? A report by WHO in October says the IFR is now at 0.23%

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

It seems to get lower and lower every month. I remember back in March some estimates had it at 3%!

So if it's at 0.23% now that makes it "only" 2.3 times more fatal than the Flu?

Well the link states it varies widely globally as we know very well by now. Countries which have seen over 500 deaths per million have an estimated IFR of 0.57%, which is all of Europe, North America, Latin America and parts of the Middle East and North Africa. I thought it was pretty obvious by now as multiple antibody studies in New York, Sweden, UK etc have indicated an IFR of about 0.6-0.7% very consisntently in Western countries for months .Perhaps it's dropped down to 0.57% since those studies with better treatements

Charles Babbage

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What do the Maths heads make of this? A report by WHO in October says the IFR is now at 0.23%

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

It seems to get lower and lower every month. I remember back in March some estimates had it at 3%!

So if it's at 0.23% now that makes it "only" 2.3 times more fatal than the Flu?

The IFR for flu is not as high as 0.1%, there is a lot of flu that is never tested.

bb1234567

Blut2 wrote: »

Obesity (apart from age) seems to be the #1 factor in likelihood of death. The US leads in the world in that, so will probably end up with a significantly higher IFR than most countries.

Their infection rate probably isn't as high as 42%, but its definitely much much higher than their total confirmed tests, on top of that. Its been let run rampant in most of the country since May.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/12/10/almost-one-in-five-americans-may-have-been-infected-with-covid-19
Estimated that just under 20% of US population has been infected. With 1030 deaths per million currently that estimate would correspond very accurately with WHO's IFR estimate of 0.57% in developed countries.

So I guess it means in an uncontrolled scenario about 15-20,000 Irish people might have died over the course of who knows how long that would take, if 2/3 of the country eventually got it. A lot lower than the crazy estimates back in march of nearly 100k dying but maybe not as exaggerated as some people began to claim the predictions were later

wadacrack

ShineOn7 wrote: »

What do the Maths heads make of this? A report by WHO in October says the IFR is now at 0.23%

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

It seems to get lower and lower every month. I remember back in March some estimates had it at 3%!

So if it's at 0.23% now that makes it "only" 2.3 times more fatal than the Flu?

I think you are comparing case fatality rate to Infection fatality rate. CFR for Covid is still quite high

Solli

bb1234567 wrote: »

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/12/10/almost-one-in-five-americans-may-have-been-infected-with-covid-19
Estimated that just under 20% of US population has been infected. With 1030 deaths per million currently that estimate would correspond very accurately with WHO's IFR estimate of 0.57% in developed countries.

So I guess it means in an uncontrolled scenario about 15-20,000 Irish people might have died over the course of who knows how long that would take, if 2/3 of the country eventually got it. A lot lower than the crazy estimates back in march of nearly 100k dying but maybe not as exaggerated as some people began to claim the predictions were later

However our access to hospital beds does not conform to that of a developed country.
That’s why we impose restrictions earlier.

normanoffside

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The CDC did that in September. At that time their current best estimates were:

0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

Again that needs more specificity. IFR will be much higher in a 91 year old than a 71 year old. Lumping them in the same age group gives inacurate numbers as some countries will have a lot more 80+/90+ year old than others.

Windmill100000

Just clicked on the opening post where an estimate was made that 50% of people in Ireland will get coronovirus, with or without symptoms.

That was 9 months ago and today we stand at 86,129 cases.

Reflecting back, we haven't done too bad.

bb1234567

normanoffside wrote: »

Again that needs more specificity. IFR will be much higher in a 91 year old than a 71 year old. Lumping them in the same age group gives inacurate numbers as some countries will have a lot more 80+/90+ year old than others.

Yes I have no idea why over 65 or 70 are lumped in with much older age groups when IFR appears to double with each decade of age
Tbf not many countries have significant populations over 90 though so maybe that's why it's excluded in majority of studies, but there's 6 million people in Europe over 90 though so it's more important to know that here

ShineOn7

wadacrack wrote: »

I think you are comparing case fatality rate to Infection fatality rate. CFR for Covid is still quite high

I'm quoting IFR from the WHO article though

And isn't CFR nowhere near as accurate a metric as IFR for working out how lethal a virus is?

ShineOn7

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The IFR for flu is not as high as 0.1%, there is a lot of flu that is never tested.

So what is the IFR of Flu?