Let's take a look at the facts about IFR in the U.S. The CDC has estimated that the nationwide IFR for the United States is 0.65 percent. The CDC's Latest Antibody Data Confirm Huge Interstate Differences in COVID-19 Fatality Rates The findings suggest that people infected in Connecticut were 10 times as likely to die as people infected in Utah or Oregon. https://reason.com/2020/10/20/the-c...state-differences-in-covid-19-fatality-rates/ The latest data from antibody studies conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) across the country confirm that the death rate among Americans infected by the COVID-19 virus varies very widely from one state to another. The CDC's prevalence estimates for August, combined with contemporaneous death counts, suggest that the infection fatality rate (IFR) was at least 10 times higher in Connecticut than in Idaho, Nebraska, Oregon, Tennessee, or Utah, for example. The CDC estimated the number of people who had been infected in each state based on antibody screening of blood samples drawn for routine diagnostic tests unrelated to COVID-19. Those patients may not have been representative of the general population, and the number of samples tested was relatively small in most states, leading to wide confidence intervals. Still, the CDC's numbers give us a sense of the gap between confirmed cases and total infections (including cases with mild or no symptoms) in each state. I combined those estimates with the death tolls reported by Worldometer as of August 15 to estimate IFRs. The estimated IFRs range from less than 0.4 percent in Idaho, Nebraska, Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah to 3.8 percent in Connecticut. Most states (27) had estimated IFRs below 1 percent, although 20 reached or exceeded that threshold. The CDC did not report prevalence estimates for Hawaii, South Dakota, or Wyoming. Based on data from other countries, the CDC has estimated that the nationwide IFR for the United States is 0.65 percent, although the estimate varies dramatically with age, from 0.003 percent among people 19 or younger to 5.4 percent among people in their 70s. If you look at the 10 states with the biggest populations, you can see that the estimated IFR based on the CDC's prevalence numbers is similar to the CDC's nationwide IFR estimate in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Georgia; lower in California; and higher in New York, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, North Carolina, and Michigan. The estimated IFR for New York, the state with the highest infection rate, is 0.75 percent. That IFR is somewhat higher than the estimate suggested by an antibody study that the New York State Department of Health conducted in April, when it put statewide infection prevalence at 14 percent, compared to the CDC's estimate of 22.5 percent in August. Given the uncertainties of extrapolating from the blood samples analyzed by the CDC, which were not randomly drawn from the general population, we should not put too much stock in these state-specific IFR estimates. But the high estimated IFRs for Northeastern states such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island are consistent with their high case fatality rates (deaths as a share of confirmed cases). Conversely, the lower IFR estimates for states such as Arkansas, California, Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah are consistent with their lower case fatality rates. Why do COVID-19 patients fare so much worse in some states than others? Possible explanations include age demographics, the prevalence of preexisting medical conditions, the quality and capacity of local health care systems (including the extent to which they are strained by the pandemic), and population density, which not only makes it easier for the virus to move from person to person but may result in larger virus doses and more dangerous infections. Another factor could be the timing of each state's epidemic, since the development of more effective treatments may have improved outcomes for people infected more recently.
Interesting numbers, but as they say the accuracy is low as the data especially in some areas is low and this is based around antibody tests which also don't work well, mate tested positive for virus 99% sure had it, then 4weeks later tested negative for antibodys so ??
Seeing that antibody immunity for COVID only lasts for 2 to 7 months after you have it --- it is not surprising a person's antibody immunity has disappeared when tested. This is why all these reinfections are occurring. Even Boris Johnson who previously had COVID previously is isolating now that he has been exposed again. It is pretty obvious that the U.K. government is very aware you can catch COVID a second time --- and natural antibody immunity lasts a few mere months.
Or it could be that you can test negative in the morning, positive at lunch, negative at dinner and positive before bedtime. This testing is flawed, and it's flawed in a big way.This is indisputable.
Certain types of tests are flawed -- but not all. The viral PCR test are very accurate in determining if you are currently infected but they take a couple days to process. The Rapid Covid Antigen test are not very accurate but they have only started to be rolled out in the U.S. in October and are not available in most states. The Anti-Body tests to see if you have immunity (anti-bodies) were inaccurate at first but became more accurate over the past three months.
This is true but the testing is beginning to open up some solutions by cobbling imperfect solutions together. Example, up until just very, very recently you had to quarantine for 14 days once you arrived in Hawaii or Alaska. Needless to say for states dependent on tourism and having to travel to the 48 for many types of business, their economies just went tits up- and travelers found no way to get around it. Now, if you are committed to going, they will let you go if you take a covid test before you leave and then another test two days after you arrive and I don't think you have to quarantine during that 2 day period, not sure, they are adjusting rules weekly. It's not just tourism of course. Several fish processing plants in Alaska, for example, did not open up this season because they could not bring in seasonal workers from outside by the hundreds as they usually do. Now, they can do double testing- once before arrival and another after- to try to do workarounds. Some of the tests may be shaky and flaky but when you double up you start putting odds in your favor, and then do frequent testing of the workers while they are working there. It helps. Is it perfect? Nope.
Expected as that's Corona Viruses for you, I might of even had it twice, something very close to the first 1 slightly worse 6weeks back. BUT If anyone had been tested twice with it, ( 2 cases early on, bad tests ) then the media would be jumping all over it, but wave 1 only the worst affected got tested early on, worse they had it, longer the immunity lasts but still, odd. My Step Lad had 2weeks, quarantining with his dad, his GF had it, then he had it, 14days then someone in his year at schools had it another 14days, 6 weeks off school, madness. All I see is previously Shielding with it from the stat's.
Not happened anywhere yet, not even Italy that looked so bad, just media over hyping it. Likely in some 3rd world countries with barely any health care, life expectancy is pretty low in those places anyway, cheap to live though.
So all of those states in the U.S. who are currently shipping COVID patients to other states because their hospitals are full ---- are not an example of hospitals overflowing.