You are conflating outcomes with cases in progress.
To understand severity, work with outcomes and that is dead people divided by recovered people.
Infected people will eventually arrive at their outcome, but until they have actually ran their infection course, adding them into the risk assessment artificially marginalizes risk.
Early on, before we understood treatment, the outcome numbers, chance of someone dying was quite high, 7 percent or so depending.
It is currently a little over 1 percent and will likely improve as the science does, and our ability to treat cases is managed better. And that assumes we can get people vaccinated in high enough numbers to manage mutation rates.
So far, vaccinated people do not die. Vast improvement over the 1'ish percentage currently in play for unvaccinated people.
Without that, we run the very real risk of a mutation sending us back to the beginning.
I have had this exact conversation with people who died thinking their low risk assessment, dividing dead people by infected people, made sense.
It does not, and it does not because outcomes are being mixed in with cases in progress. It is like combining the wrong units and wondering why nature does not match the math.
You are conflating outcomes with cases in progress.
To understand severity, work with outcomes and that is dead people divided by recovered people.
Infected people will eventually arrive at their outcome, but until they have actually ran their infection course, adding them into the risk assessment artificially marginalizes risk.
Early on, before we understood treatment, the outcome numbers, chance of someone dying was quite high, 7 percent or so depending.
It is currently a little over 1 percent and will likely improve as the science does, and our ability to treat cases is managed better. And that assumes we can get people vaccinated in high enough numbers to manage mutation rates.
So far, vaccinated people do not die. Vast improvement over the 1'ish percentage currently in play for unvaccinated people.
Without that, we run the very real risk of a mutation sending us back to the beginning.
I have had this exact conversation with people who died thinking their low risk assessment, dividing dead people by infected people, made sense.
It does not, and it does not because outcomes are being mixed in with cases in progress. It is like combining the wrong units and wondering why nature does not match the math.