Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
You said "worst case" is a few thousand. As I look at it now, you're saying 2% of far less than 30%, so, what, 2% of 20%? Still well over 1 million. So by a "few" thousand you mean a couple thousand thousand?
Worst case here is the likes of which we haven't seen since 1918. Worse than Aids, and I don't know about you, but I watched a lot of people die from aids.
|
I’m being wildly generous with that 30%. If you take a worldwide assumption of peak 500 mil, out of 7.7 billion people on Earth, roughly 1/15th (6.6%) of the world will be infected.
6.6% of 320 mil is 21,120,000. 2% of 21,120,000 is 422,400.
That’s much more than my earlier assumption. But it’s also based off a model which does not take into account where those 500 mil cases will be. They could be largely kept to China, India, etc. And the death rates may vary wildly by location. So we may enjoy a much lower rate while China and Iran are responsible for the higher scores driving the majority of that 2% worldwide average.
I totally agree this’ll be way worse than AIDS. Transmission differences render AIDS a million times more containable.
