Can anyone explain this???

[edthecynic]

I'm not a genius

OBVIOUSLY!
The first true thing you have ever posted!!!!!

Being intelligent is a relative concept bud

I may not be a genius by western standards...But with relative to you I am...hahahaha

Considering your inability to engage on this subject, i'd bet a lot of money you're poor too.

Remember your place pleb.

Virgin into astronomy who can't debate. You're an impressive mess. Emotional intelligence of a rock to go along with your poor math.

Grow up, child!

 

[edthecynic]

8% of all tested are positive, and right now in the US 3% will die.

The Trump death rate is 5%.
From the cited linked in the OP:
3,749,026
Cases which had an outcome:

3,558,367 (95%)
Recovered / Discharged

190,659 (5%)
Deaths

 

[jbrownson0831]

8% of all tested are positive, and right now in the US 3% will die.

The Trump death rate is 5%.
From the cite linked in the OP:
3,749,026
Cases which had an outcome:

3,558,367 (95%)
Recovered / Discharged

190,659 (5%)
Deaths

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

 

[edthecynic]

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

Dividing deaths into total cases is the most ignorant and therefore Trumpian way to accurately determine the % death rate!!!!!
You are making the IDIOTIC assumption that NONE of the active cases will die.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

Dividing deaths into total cases is the most ignorant and therefore Trumpian way to accurately determine the % death rate!!!!!
You are making the IDIOTIC assumption that NONE of the active cases will die.

Not really snowflake.....cases and deaths are immediate with no influence from idiots like you....if you use that metric and measure the change over time, you have a viable statistic which I know would give you a headache if you had a brain.

 

[Faun]

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

Dividing deaths into total cases is the most ignorant and therefore Trumpian way to accurately determine the % death rate!!!!!
You are making the IDIOTIC assumption that NONE of the active cases will die.

Not really snowflake.....cases and deaths are immediate with no influence from idiots like you....if you use that metric and measure the change over time, you have a viable statistic which I know would give you a headache if you had a brain.

No, Ed's right. It makes no sense to simply divide the number of cases by the number of deaths. That mathematically assumes that 100% of the current cases will survive, which of course, is ludicrous.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

Dividing deaths into total cases is the most ignorant and therefore Trumpian way to accurately determine the % death rate!!!!!
You are making the IDIOTIC assumption that NONE of the active cases will die.

Not really snowflake.....cases and deaths are immediate with no influence from idiots like you....if you use that metric and measure the change over time, you have a viable statistic which I know would give you a headache if you had a brain.

No, Ed's right. It makes no sense to simply divide the number of cases by the number of deaths. That mathematically assumes that 100% of the current cases will survive, which of course, is ludicrous.

It assumes nothing of the sort.....when anyone dies from the virus the stats are updated immediately, just as when someone tests positive. When someone recovers it may not be reported for months, at the leisure of the propaganda media. So total cases and total deaths are the only two unbiased metrics along with total tests.

 

[Faun]

Well goofy the recovered cases are not reported for months, the deaths are immediate just like the case count. So simply divide deaths into cases to get the most unbiased metric. You see, the wackos have no reason to report on recovered cases in timely fashion it makes them look like the idiots they are.

Dividing deaths into total cases is the most ignorant and therefore Trumpian way to accurately determine the % death rate!!!!!
You are making the IDIOTIC assumption that NONE of the active cases will die.

Not really snowflake.....cases and deaths are immediate with no influence from idiots like you....if you use that metric and measure the change over time, you have a viable statistic which I know would give you a headache if you had a brain.

No, Ed's right. It makes no sense to simply divide the number of cases by the number of deaths. That mathematically assumes that 100% of the current cases will survive, which of course, is ludicrous.

It assumes nothing of the sort.....when anyone dies from the virus the stats are updated immediately, just as when someone tests positive. When someone recovers it may not be reported for months, at the leisure of the propaganda media. So total cases and total deaths are the only two unbiased metrics along with total tests.

Of course it assumes there will be no more deaths.

If there are 1000 cases total and there were 10 deaths total, the method you promote would produce a mortality rate of 1%. But the only way that 1% mortality rate holds up among those 1000 cases once they're closed is if not one more single person among those 1000 dies.