General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLancet: Likelihood of death due to coronavirus disease 2019
Original article title:
Likelihood of survival of coronavirus disease 2019
Comparisons of case fatality ratios for SARS, COVID-19, and seasonal influenza in different age groups are shown in the figure. Even though the fatality rate is low for younger people, it is very clear that any suggestion of COVID-19 being just like influenza is false: even for those aged 2029 years, once infected with SARS-CoV-2, the mortality rate is 33 times higher than that from seasonal influenza. For people aged 60 years and older, the chance of survival following SARS-CoV-2 infection is approximately 95% in the absence of comorbid conditions. However, the chance of survival will be considerably decreased if the patient has underlying health conditions, and continues to decrease with age beyond 60 years.5, 6
Although China seems to be out of the woods now, many other countries are facing tremendous pressure from the COVID-19 pandemic. The strategies of early detection, early diagnosis, early isolation, and early treatment that were practised in China6 are likely to be not only useful in controlling the outbreak, but also contribute to decreasing the case fatality ratio of the disease.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30257-7/fulltext
The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)There ought to be a header on the columns saying so. People are going to have heart attacks before they can figure it out, looking at some of those numbers....
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)UpInArms
(51,252 posts)But I can change the OP title
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Those are not the survival probabilities. They are the death probabilities.
UpInArms
(51,252 posts)The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)Nobody really meant to jump on you.
The information is useful. Thank you for sharing it.
pansypoo53219
(20,906 posts)Poiuyt
(18,087 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,746 posts)Do I have an 8.6% chance of surviving? Or an 8.6% chance of dying? There's a huge difference.
I suspect the correct answer is that I have an 8.6% chance of dying, although since I'm vastly healthier than almost anyone I know my age I'm guessing have have a minuscule chance of dying.
Oh, and are those percentages based on all people in that age range? Or only those who actually get the disease?
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)see reply #11. And yes, it's the percentages who die.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)(of the USA) whether or not they caught the flu in a year.
Here's the Lancet article: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099%2820%2930257-7/fulltext
And footnote 9 says the flu statistics came from the USA, 2018-9 flu season: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html
That has, in Table 1, "Estimated influenza disease burden, by age group United States, 2018-2019 influenza season", with, for instance, for the 65+ age group, 25,555 deaths from 3,073,227 symptomatic illnesses - a case fatality ratio of 0.83%. Table 2 has "Estimated rates of influenza-associated disease outcomes, per 100,000", and those are the figures the Lancet table uses - eg for 65+, the mortality rate is 48.7 per 100,000, which is the 0.0487% we see in the Lancet table.
So the Lancet are comparing what would happen if the entire population got Covid-19, with what happens with a population with widespread flu vaccination among the vulnerable groups. The Lancet also seems to be deriving the case fatality rate from the known deaths divided by those with reported symptoms. If there's no attempt to allow for much of the population not getting symptoms bad enough to report their illness and get on statistics (which is widely believed to be the case), then saying "everyone in the USA will get symptoms bad enough to be recorded" seems unrealistic.
I'm not convinced this is a meaningful comparison.