[graeme]

Good point about tourism amongst clean zones. There will also be less domestic money that leaks out to foreign tourism: much will be spent domestically instead. Tourism is mostly a wash.

The bigger loss will likely be from whatever business/scientific travel is truly necessary. If that gets harder you may see some long run economic harm.

As for China, not obvious they have a lower fatality rate? Their official stats show a 5% CFR.

Singapore and Qatar have their cases amongst the mostly young migrant workers, which should have a much lower fatality rate due to age. I’m skeptical that any countries have a much less lethal strain. Unless we see nursing homes with widespread infections but few deaths.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-05/as-virus-...

[dredds]

Wuhan recently tested all 9 million residents and found only 300 currently positive cases, which are not included in official figures since they are all asymptomatic. If they had tested the residents for antibodies instead then we would have a much better understanding of mortality vs immunity. So it seems like a wasted effort other than forcing residents out of their homes to stand in long queues. CFR depends on knowing the percentage of all cases, not just those showing up in distress at hospitals, as i suspect their official figures actually indicated.

[graeme]

Yeah I don't expect their IFR is 5%. But, some antibody result in places like New York and Spain suggest an IFR in the 1% range.

Sinapore and Qatar are clear cases of a lower IFR, but not obvious to me that China is. Every place has undiscovered cases, the question is how many.