On every one of these threads, everyone has been quick to compare CoVID-19 to H1N1 and the annual flu. Many quote the number of people who contracted the flu or H1N1 and how many died. They, for the most part appear to be using the CDC's numbers. For the last 9 years they look like this:
2010-2011 21,000,000 had the flu. 37,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0017619
2011-2012 9,300,000 had the flu. 12,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0012903
2012-2013 34,000,000 had the flu. 43,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0012647
2013-2014 30,000,000 had the flu. 38,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0012667
2014-2015 30,000,000 had the flu. 51,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0017
2015-2016 24,000,000 had the flu. 23,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .000958
2016-2017 29,000,000 had the flu. 38,000 died from the fly. The rate of fatality was .0013103
2017-2018 45,000,000 had the flu. 61,000 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0013556*
2018-2019 35,520,883 had the flu. 34,157 died from the flu. The rate of fatality was .0009616*
2017-2019 numbers have not been finalized.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
The average rate of fatality was .00131879
These numbers include the H1N1 influenza.
Now, please compare these numbers to what the CDC (the source for all the above numbers) is saying about CoVID-19.
Case-Fatality Risk Estimates for COVID-19 Calculated by Using a Lag Time for Fatality
Essentially, the abstract states:
_____________________
Abstract
We estimated the case-fatality risk for 2019 novel coronavirus disease cases in China (3.5%); China, excluding Hubei Province (0.8%); 82 countries, territories, and areas (4.2%); and on a cruise ship (0.6%). Lower estimates might be closest to the true value, but a broad range of 0.25%–3.0% probably should be considered."
_______________________
Now, that's a pretty wide range and numbers will be vastly different dependent upon factors like how aggressively we've been about reducing the likelihood of transmission to help prevent the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Countries like China and Italy are having the issues they are having because they were slow to react. Countries like South Korea have shown the way in terms of testing and staying ahead of the curve so as not to saturate their healthcare system. It remains to be seen where the US will fall with regards to early and effective intervention to slow the spread. You know, "flatten the curve."
I only posted this so you could see the actually numbers from the CDC that seem to be thrown about on all of these threads.
With a fatality rate in the range of .25% to 3% we are talking about deaths far greater than any typical seasonal flu or even H1N1. Not nearly as high as the Spanish Flu (which, by the way was traced back to a military camp in Kansas in the good old US) where somewhere between 50,000,000 and 100,000,000 died but far more serious than than what we usually see.
BTW, attempts to stigmatize any particular nation serves no purpose whatsoever. The Spanish Flu got its name, not because the flu started there but because their press were the only ones following the spread in the earliest stages. The rest of the industrialized world was to busy paying attention to the war effort. But as I mentioned above, investigations point to it originating in a Kansas military installation. The flu was spread in Europe as American troops were deployed. This is why I say, pointing fingers serves no purpose. Sometimes sh!t happens.