The physicians extended the same logic to the state of California. They said that, at the time of the interview, 33,865 Californians were positive for coronavirus out of 280,900 Californians tested. From that, they conclude that 12% (= 33,865/280,900) of all Californians were positive for Coronavirus. Applying the 12% to Californias population of 39.5 million people, the physicians conclude that there were about 4.7 million cases of Coronavirus in California by the time of the interview!

Further, the physicians conclude that since California had 1227 coronavirus deaths, a person living in California has about 0.03% (= 100 x (1227/4.7 million)) chance of dying from coronavirus.

1) Even ignoring all the assumptions theyve made, is their interpretation of the 0.03% result correct? (I.e. That a Californian has a 0.03% chance of dying from coronavirus.) Explain.

(Hint: Walk through the steps of their math.)

2)Now that you have taken a deeper look at the physicians study design and their use of the resulting numbers, what do you think about their repeated claim of millions of exposures, very low death rate?