You missed that bit from him after the tornado in Tennessee?
Also, South Korea is looking into charging the leader of that church with murder because he intentionally provided false information to the government:
"The White House overruled health officials who wanted to recommend that elderly and physically fragile Americans be advised not to fly on commercial airlines because of the new coronavirus, a federal official told The Associated Press.
" The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention submitted the plan this week as a way of trying to control the virus, but White House officials ordered the air travel recommendation be removed, said the official who had direct knowledge of the plan. Trump administration officials have since suggested certain people should consider not traveling, but they have stopped short of the stronger guidance sought by the CDC."
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Health/wireStory/official-white-house-seniors-fly-69462660
Okay, I don’t know why (and don’t have time to research it to find out why) but the Johns Hopkins site is not accurate. At the very least, it is leaving off two deaths in the US (Florida) and handful of recovered people. I can’t figure out how they haven’t been incorporated into the numbers: the deaths were reported in the news more than 14 hours ago.
For that reason, this and future daily numbers posts will come from COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer (thanks Monty!).
That site gives the time it was updated and seems to be nearly continuously doing so. Also, if you scroll down past the numbers there are many, many links to news stories about the virus, also seemingly updated continuously.
———
106,206 confirmed infections
3,600 deaths
60,192 recovered
In the US:
444 confirmed infections
19 deaths
15 recovered
I’m sure I caught it but don’t recall atm. What’d he blather? I’m sure I’ll regret the question.
I saw a lady waiting for a bus today, wearing Baggies on her hands like gloves.
OK hadn’t heard that one. And it was yesterday. Jesus.
My northern Italy in the red zone. Can’t leave the area and should stay at home and much as possible, same as millions of people.
I just noticed these stats:
64,758 cases with an outcome
60,956 recovered (94%)
3,802 dead (6%)
Can someone who is better with statistics please explain why this 6% is not the mortality rate? Thanks in advance!
At this point, I honestly am starting to suspect that the “plan” from this administration is to simply not do tests.
“Well, if you do more tests, you’ll get more positive results. We don’t want more positive results, so therefore, we will not do any testing. Problem solved!”
In my state (New Hampshire) as of 10:30 this morning there have been a grand total of 47 tests performed. Two confirmed cases of COVID-19, two presumptive positive cases, five tests still pending and 38 negative cases.
I am not encouraged.
The mortality rate of confirmed cases identified is the deaths/confirmed cases identified, not the deaths/confirmed cases with outcomes. By definition.
Beyond definition, recovering takes significantly longer than dying.
The mortality rate is interesting as it surely depends how good the healthcare is. So I suspect the mortality rate in Iran will be a lot higher than in, say, Japan. Also the higher the number of infected people in a region the more the mortality rate will increase as hospital beds become more scarce.
So the mortality rate in China is about 3.5%, but since they started aggressively treating the ill they have got it down to 1%. But China have been good at treating people so 1% may not reflect what the rest of the world is able to achieve.
If the mortality rate is 1% in the USA, and 30% of the population becomes symptomatic - then approximately 1,000,000 people will die from this disease (327,000,000 X 0.3 X 0.01).
What China has done right is contain the illness to approximately 80,000 people by getting super serious. Not just on quarantines but on case tracing. By keeping it to 80,000 people only approximately 3,000 have died so far.
The big question is whether the USA can keep the case numbers down like China has so far. Given (a) this administration’s response so far and (b) the inability of medical professional to do case tracing without adequate testing - I can’t see this going down well. I’m very concerned about the welfare of the elderly people I know.
OTOH mortality rate is generally low for those under 65. Japan has 25% of its population 65+; Iran under 6%.
One major point concerns “what do you do if you have a respiratory infection”?
The majority of the population do over-the-counter drugs/home remedies/suffer through it–and only if the situation gets really bad go to doctors/hospitals. They will also respond in a similar manner to the 80% of the COVID-19 cases which are mild.
There are other factors at work, too.
For example, older people are more likely to die from this new virus no matter how good their care. Last I heard, men are about twice as likely to die as women even accounting for things like age and available medical care.
So… in Iran, which skews younger in population than many countries you might think “not so bad”, but their senior government guys all got sick - and they’re all old men. So among that particular group of Iranians, who are very visible and important, there might be a significantly higher death rate than you might otherwise expect, or in comparison to other nations even as the general population of Iran might have a lower than expected death rate because of youth.
The above is ENTIRELY hypothetical and intended merely illustrate how multiple factors can combine for results that may or may not be what you expect, or what someone else gets.
The rate quoted (fraction of 1% to several %, ~3% worldwide by WHO), Case Fatality Rate, is simply defined as number of deaths so far divided by number of known (‘confirmed’) cases so far. So at least pedantically somebody could just answer that it’s not defined as you suggest simply because…it’s not defined that way. 
Your point has potential merit as a statistic to look at. The drawback would be, as already mentioned, the timing difference. All the people who are going to recover from already known cases have not done so, and intuitively at least what people really want to know is ‘what % of people who get this will eventually die’.
OTOH the CFR also has this problem, in the other direction. Among those people who already have the disease, more are going to die than already have, so it’s optimistic to only count those who died so far v all the cases up to today (some of which will end in death days or weeks from now).
Then there’s the denominator issue most discussion focuses on. The 64k does not include at least some mild or asymptomatic cases that never get counted. Maybe a huge number depending where and when.
Which IMO still means you just can’t say what the ‘chance of dying from this disease’ actually is. Much as I respect the info from some posters here, I tend to go with ‘reputable media’ on stuff like this and expectation seems to be in the 1% zone, The Economist’s (to me) fairly sobering cover two weeks ago, 0.5-1%, could infect 10’s of % of the world’s population=millions of deaths. But we’re all going to die eventually, and older people sooner than younger people. Not to be a jerk I hope, but you have to evaluate the prospect of millions of deaths to this v what happens all the time, though also consider that most people don’t think that realistically of what happens all the time, so panic is definitely an option for them. Which is where IMO comes some tendency sometimes to put thumbs a bit on the scale to push less worse outcomes than what might be the midpoint expectation. Not because the midpoint is the end of the world, but because people still aren’t ready mentally for something much worse than ‘a typical annual flu’ and also far short of ‘end of the world’.
Also just reading this thread, it’s getting more political and less useful than looking further back, IMO.