Much of this has already been stated, but here's my 2 cents:
1. Overall deaths are probably under-reported, but number of infected is without doubt vastly-under-reported. The number infected is known as the denominator when calculating mortality rate, therefore the actual mortality rate will significantly decrease.
2. US mortality rate for the most-deadly flu, the Spanish Flu, was a fraction of the global rate...1.1 % vs 4.6%.
3. The reported mortality rate for China (yes, I know it is suspect) in the first 10 days (January) was 17.3% of known cases. After 2/1 it was reported down to .7%. The current overall reported rate in China is still heavily-weighted by that initial outbreak where their doctors where still trying to figure out what they were dealing with. Many sick people were not treated in time because doctors were focusing only on the most critically ill. Had the less ill been treated sooner, much fewer would have died.
4. South Korea's mortality rate has been reported to be .57%. Germany's 0%.
5. If the mortality rate doesn't go down (it will, and probably drastically), based on existing rates and assuming the same number of people in the US get infected as did the flu last year, the 61,000 figure the OP mentioned would be more like 1,400,000. That in an estimated population in excess of 327,000,000. However, if after more accurate data is included the mortality rate drops to, for example, .5%, then using the OP's #'s, etc, would put the total deaths around 427,000.
6. We just don't really know what the real mortality rate is, and probably won't have anything close to a realistic number for quite a while. But history suggests the rate will ultimately be exponentially less than the numbers being reported now.
7. Keep in mind the mortality rates vary exponentially by age group & relative pre-exposure health of those infected.
1. Overall deaths are probably under-reported, but number of infected is without doubt vastly-under-reported. The number infected is known as the denominator when calculating mortality rate, therefore the actual mortality rate will significantly decrease.
2. US mortality rate for the most-deadly flu, the Spanish Flu, was a fraction of the global rate...1.1 % vs 4.6%.
3. The reported mortality rate for China (yes, I know it is suspect) in the first 10 days (January) was 17.3% of known cases. After 2/1 it was reported down to .7%. The current overall reported rate in China is still heavily-weighted by that initial outbreak where their doctors where still trying to figure out what they were dealing with. Many sick people were not treated in time because doctors were focusing only on the most critically ill. Had the less ill been treated sooner, much fewer would have died.
4. South Korea's mortality rate has been reported to be .57%. Germany's 0%.
5. If the mortality rate doesn't go down (it will, and probably drastically), based on existing rates and assuming the same number of people in the US get infected as did the flu last year, the 61,000 figure the OP mentioned would be more like 1,400,000. That in an estimated population in excess of 327,000,000. However, if after more accurate data is included the mortality rate drops to, for example, .5%, then using the OP's #'s, etc, would put the total deaths around 427,000.
6. We just don't really know what the real mortality rate is, and probably won't have anything close to a realistic number for quite a while. But history suggests the rate will ultimately be exponentially less than the numbers being reported now.
7. Keep in mind the mortality rates vary exponentially by age group & relative pre-exposure health of those infected.
Last edited: