Death rate (world) per this info:

**16%** Recovery rate:

**21% **
Death rate for US:

**45%** Recovery rate:

**55%**
This dataset is all we have to work with. The obvious fly in the data soup is the definition of exactly how many people actually have the CV, and how many have died of CV. The data is murky as a Liberal's logic.

It is a clear case of GIGO. It could be an order of magnitude wrong either fargin way: Worse

*or* better.

One thing that is not even usable conceptually is the "official" method of figuring the fargin death rate by dividing the whole walking-around world of "maybe" CV in some stage of its infection by the number of dead.

That is not stupid, it is misleading as a sumbitch. Senseless.

If you use

deaths as a "valid" number to define

death rate, then you MUST use

recoveries as a "valid" number to define

recovery rate.

Figuring it like a politician, you divide the world number of infected by the world number of deaths, and you get the political number: 30,982 (dead) divided by 669,312 (total infected) =

**4.6% death rate. **<-- And that is what is published just about everywhere.

But then, complete the numerology exercise by

*using exactly the same half-witted finagling*:

142,100 divided by 669,312 =

**21% recovery rate**
Logic would tell you the math problem

has not been completed. You

*cannot* have just one "rate" without the other.

They are saying that a piece of string has only one end on it.