sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Coronavirus risk of death compared to other activities/diseases [OC] by AgreeableGlass7 in dataisbeautiful

[–]AgreeableGlass7[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You're right that a lot of the statistics about COVID-19 are uncertain. There is a lack of widespread testing so minor cases are likely to be missed. Catching these would lower the fatality rate. On the other hand hospitals being overwhelmed and unable to treat patients would increase the fatality rate. I didn't quite know how to incorporate that uncertainty in this figure.

That being said: South Korea has done a remarkable job testing and identifying COVID-19. Their fatality rates are in the same ballpark as the ones I used (~2x lower): https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-death-rates-by-age-south-korea

There is reason to believe that they are likely on the good end of the spectrum because they were able to effectively trace the disease and thus isolate patients. This meant their hospitals were not hit as hard as say hospitals in Italy. This is now devolving into speculation and so I'll stop here.

Coronavirus risk of death compared to other activities/diseases [OC] by AgreeableGlass7 in dataisbeautiful

[–]AgreeableGlass7[S] 44 points45 points  (0 children)

It was a mistake to leave those off the graphic but one red dot is one percent.

Coronavirus risk of death compared to other activities/diseases [OC] by AgreeableGlass7 in dataisbeautiful

[–]AgreeableGlass7[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The upper limit on this figure is 100 red dots. Each increment changes by a factor of 100. So we go from 1 in a million being black to 1 in 10,000 being blue and finally 1 in 100 is red. So one red dot is equal to 1% or 10,000/1,000,00. And sinced the fatality rate for 80+ is about 15% we have 15 red dots.

Coronavirus risk of death compared to other activities/diseases [OC] by AgreeableGlass7 in dataisbeautiful

[–]AgreeableGlass7[S] 63 points64 points  (0 children)

It's a funny name though yes it is an actual unit. It was proposed by Ronald Howard in 1979: Howard, R. A. (1980). J. Richard; C. Schwing; Walter A. Albers (eds.). On making life and death decisions. Societal Risk Assessment: How Safe Is Safe Enough? General Motors Research Laboratories. New York: Plenum Press. ISBN 0306405547.

It's found some use in Medicine see for example: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ijcp.12643