# Bern Researchers Produce New Coronavirus Fatality Estimate

Waiting for a train at LA's Union Station in the coronavirus era.Kevin Drum

There are two obvious biases when trying to estimate the death rate from coronavirus. First, there’s the likelihood that there are a lot more infected people than the official reports say. This includes people without symptoms as well as people who have mild symptoms and simply never seek treatment. Second, at any point in time there are people with the virus who are going to die but haven’t died yet. The first bias tends to produce overestimates of the death rate while the second produces underestimates.

A team of researchers from the University of Bern has applied some sophisticated statistical techniques to the known data in order to (try to) correct for these biases. They produce an overall estimate for the case fatality rate of 1.6 percent. That is, out of everyone infected with the coronavirus, 1.6 percent will eventually die. They also produce estimates for age groups, which are even more skewed toward the elderly than previous estimates:

Up through age 50, the death rate from coronavirus is less than half a percent, and nearly zero among children and teenagers. At age 70, the overall death rate is 9.8 percent and jumps to 20 percent if you have any symptoms. As always, this is only one estimate and shouldn’t be taken as the final word.

By the way, this is why health professionals are reluctant to close schools due to the coronavirus: young people are unlikely to be affected by the virus, and during the swine flu outbreak of 2009, when schools were closed, it meant that many parents had to stay home. Keeping kids home not only increased the risk that they might infect older people—who were far more vulnerable—but it also kept parents at home, including health care workers who were needed to care for other patients. On net, keeping kids home actually increased the transmission of the virus instead of reducing it.

### WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about \$45,000 short of our \$300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of \$350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

### WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about \$45,000 short of our \$300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of \$350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.