Yes. It is worse than a regular flu. But, if you look at statistics from S. Korea, the only country with a substantial infection and trust worthy numbers (as in they test heavily), the death rate is around 0.6% overall. So not the end of the world, but nothing to be complacent about either.
If the White house will get out of the way and let the system work, we may still have time to mitigate the worst here in the USA. But of course, we don't even want to cancel SXSW. What more needs to be said? <insert Darwin thumbs up gif >
Addition: No, I "trust" the reported numbers from Italy. I think they are missing a lot of mild cases that are not being reported or tested. When I checked a few days ago, it looked like of the tests that South Korea ran, only 5% or so were positive. So, their infected numbers are probably more accurate. The death rate may still be higher, because we don't know how many in the infected population as of today will recover. One could for example calculate the death rate as [Number_of_deaths.today]/[Number_infected.x_days_ago]
I don't really know the "x" to use in this circumstance, but just using 7 days (since a lot of deaths occurred in 7-9 days from positive detection), the death rate may be about a factor of 2 higher. So about 1% overall. I have been looking at so many different sources in the last few days, I can't seem to find the sites where I got the numbers for the above calculations from. So I might be off by a bit.
You're making a somewhat dangerous mistake in your analysis. South Korea's death rate is not well established yet: 7% of their cases were new just in the last day, and they've had very few people with confirmed recovery yet. There are likely to be more deaths to come.
To correctly analyze the morality rates you have to take a lot of things into account: hardly anyone is being honest (South Korea is better, but not perfect), testing is rate limited, death rates are a lagging indicator, etc. etc. etc.
Lots of experts have made guesses with these assumptions factored in, but at this point, there is so much uncertainty it's hard for anyone to tell.
Agreed. I had tried to account for it, but did not write it since I was hoping to avoid a longer comment and those calculations are more fraught with errors.. Edited my parent comment now to include all of it.
In the linked figure in the article, the SK tests have about 5x more per million people so their denominator is likely a better idea of the true number of cases.
Addition: No, I "trust" the reported numbers from Italy. I think they are missing a lot of mild cases that are not being reported or tested. When I checked a few days ago, it looked like of the tests that South Korea ran, only 5% or so were positive. So, their infected numbers are probably more accurate. The death rate may still be higher, because we don't know how many in the infected population as of today will recover. One could for example calculate the death rate as [Number_of_deaths.today]/[Number_infected.x_days_ago] I don't really know the "x" to use in this circumstance, but just using 7 days (since a lot of deaths occurred in 7-9 days from positive detection), the death rate may be about a factor of 2 higher. So about 1% overall. I have been looking at so many different sources in the last few days, I can't seem to find the sites where I got the numbers for the above calculations from. So I might be off by a bit.