It has become popular in the USA to cite a 99% survival rate for COVID-19. However, this survival rate fits into the saying popularized by Mark Twain that “there are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics.” The 99% figure is only possible through an absolutely true statistic that leads to a false conclusion. From where does the 99% statistic come?
If we look at the statistics on COVID-19, we have the following figures today: 111,000 have died; 1,930,000 have been confirmed as having statistics. If we do traditional medical statistics, then we can calculate a near to 6% death rate. But, that contradicts the 99% survival rate. We need to look at the way the statistics are being used. So, let’s do some math.
, or total deaths divided by total cases times 100. But, that is certainly not the 99% survival rate. The people who use the 99% survival rate are playing games, or as Mark Twain said, “then there are statistics.” The only way one can get the 99% figure is to use the total population of the United States, even those who have yet to be exposed. The current population of the USA is estimated at 328,200,000. What those who do the 99% survival rate due is to work only with the total population of the USA. It makes the figures look a lot better.
, or total deaths divided by total population times 100. This gives a medically deceptive 0.03% death rate and an equally deceptive 99.97% survival rate. In order to see why this is deceptive, let us look at what happens if we treat other figures in this same way. Let’s look at the 1918 pandemic.
, or total deaths divided by the total population times 100. This gives a medically deceptive 0.65% death rate and an equally deceptive 99.35% survival rate. It is a wonder that our great grandparents were so worried. So, let’s look at the Vietnam War. That conflict lasted from 1954-1975.
, so this tells us that during Vietnam, the death rate was like that of right now and less than the 1918 pandemic. Why 99.97% of the people in the USA survived! It was not really that bad a war. As some have pointed out, every year and a half the same number of people who were killed in Vietnam are killed on American roads. So, let’s look at World War II, certainly, it was much worse, right?
Here is an interesting thought about World War II. Worldwide, an estimated 70-85,000,000 people died. Even so, that was only about 3% of the population of the world in 1940. This meant that 97% of the people in the world survived! Why were we so worried? In the USA, the statistics were significantly better.
, so in World War II, the survival rate in the USA was 99.69% survival rate. THAT IS ACTUALLY AN OVER 99% SURVIVAL RATE IN WORLD WAR II. I wonder why we were so concerned and why so many movies picture crying mothers receiving telegrams? <== sarcasm
You see, the people who are using the 99% survival rate are deliberately using statistics in a way in which they are normally not used when giving reports of the deadliness of a war or of a disease. For instance, the statistics as normally reported show that during Vietnam, 9.7% of the available young generation went to Vietnam between 1964 and 1973. That is not the total who served, but the total percentage of that generation who were physically in Vietnam. The total who served of the available young generation was higher. Compared to the total population, that is almost nothing, but compared to the young generation, one out of every ten young men (mostly) and some women went to Vietnam and a higher ratio than that served since not all had to go to Vietnam. Many served in other places. It had a profound effect on the culture.
In the same way, World War II and, yes, the 1918 pandemic had profound effects upon the culture. But, if you play with the statistics you can show that almost no one was directly in danger. The statistics are that in World War II, almost 11% of the population of the USA served. Even then, of the 11% service rate, only 2.53% of them died. So, if you are playing with statistics, serving in the Armed Forces of the United States in World War II was basically safe, you could serve and have an over 97% survival rate. And, if you did not serve, you had little chance of dying due to the war.
That, of course, is the problem of playing with statistics. As Mark Twain warned us, statistics are a wonderful way to misunderstand something and, in the worst case, useful for deliberately misleading without being able to be called to account. The people who are using the 99% statistics very carefully do not apply that same type of statistical calculation to events such as Vietnam or World War II. Those events are graven into the psyche of America so they are untouchable although they have some of the same survival rates as COVID-19 when calculated using the same methodology. The 99% people do not use medical statistics in the way they are normally used. They also carefully ignore New York City, New Jersey, Spain, Northern Italy, etc., as examples of what could have happened had not stay-at-home orders been imposed. In fact, they treat the deaths from COVID-19 as what would have happened regardless. The 99% people give little to no credit to any prophylactic policies. Thus, they will never say that the 111,000 deaths could have been much higher had we not imposed preventative policies. Rather, they again play with numbers by saying that it was not that bad, implying thereby that it would have been no worse had people been allowed to congregate freely.
I could go on with the mistakes made, but this will give you a reasonable idea of why the 99% people are wrong.
Many Pithy quotes from Mr. Twain