I’ll point out the same issues I always point out when I see tables like this.
Approximately 0.2% of the population of NYC has died from Covid-19, which means a pretty solid lower bound on the IFR (which is lower than the CFR) is in that ballpark. We don’t really know what the total percentage of people infected is, but it is unlikely to be near 100% in NYC.
Similarly, in rural New Mexico on the Navajo reservation, about 0.15% of the total,population of McKinley county has now died of Covid-19. The pace of new cases is starting to decrease somewhat, but is only just off of the peak. And every day, even with 50-60 new positives, there are 100 new negative test results. So the arguments that we are close to 100% infection rates in these places just don’t pass the smell test.
My best guess is more or less unchanged of an IFR somewhere around 0.5 to 1.5%, probably depending on the demographics of the state.
I know the guys at the CDC are professionals, but I have yet to hear a cogent explanation of how a disease that has a 0.2% IFR can kill 0.2% of a population without a 100% infection rate. And here the CDC is saying 0.4% is a ‘best guess’ for the CFR, which would imply an IFR of 0.2 or 0.3. I just don’t buy that 0.15% of McKinley county has died and see how you can square those numbers.
About 1.5% of the county has been officially diagnosed. Even assuming 50% of people are asymptomatic, and a large number of people don’t have access to testing on the res, I don’t see how you can get to more than a 10 or 15 percent infection rate.
