Could you please explain how you got this number? If I look at the statistics for the most countries in Europe I'll see a ratio of around 2/100 between detected cases and deaths (Germany, Belgium). That would mean that we would have around 5x more cases than we detect ,if we see "mild" as doesn't die. If you define "mild" as "not in hospital" this number would be even higher (meaning in some case that more than 100% of the population of a country would have had covid). So please explain your numbers and reasoning.
Looking at your previous comments, it seems you like to throw out this stat and other... less than factual statements, then never back up your comments or engage in the conversation. You are trolling or misguided.
You are conflating outcomes with cases in progress.
To understand severity, work with outcomes and that is dead people divided by recovered people.
Infected people will eventually arrive at their outcome, but until they have actually ran their infection course, adding them into the risk assessment artificially marginalizes risk.
Early on, before we understood treatment, the outcome numbers, chance of someone dying was quite high, 7 percent or so depending.
It is currently a little over 1 percent and will likely improve as the science does, and our ability to treat cases is managed better. And that assumes we can get people vaccinated in high enough numbers to manage mutation rates.
So far, vaccinated people do not die. Vast improvement over the 1'ish percentage currently in play for unvaccinated people.
Without that, we run the very real risk of a mutation sending us back to the beginning.
I have had this exact conversation with people who died thinking their low risk assessment, dividing dead people by infected people, made sense.
It does not, and it does not because outcomes are being mixed in with cases in progress. It is like combining the wrong units and wondering why nature does not match the math.