Which already assumes that the current CFR of 5.3% is 5.3 times higher than that 1% IFR to get to 10 times the flu’s 0.1% IFR. And that CFR will undoubtedly increase, but regardless, let’s look at a country that did mass testing and tracing and has reopened their society: South Korea.

South Korea currently has a CFR or 2.2% (236 deaths out of 10,674), and that has been gradually rising since despite adding few cases over the last few weeks (less than 29.1 per day; 0.28% daily increase) people are still dying (1.87 per day; 0.85% daily increase), likely because some people can take months (2 died in the last 2 weeks from the Princess Cruise, 2 months later).

Regardless, because they instituted a mass test and trace program (and isolation), only 1.9% is their tests have come back positive, compared to about 20% here.

In other words, only about 1 out of every 53 people they tested, was positive. So it’s hard to say that they were missing a lot of cases, when they proactively tested, traced contacts (and tested them), and isolated them from spreading. And they weren’t just testing symptomatic cases because of that. And such a low positive rate on top of that, despite testing the individuals most likely to have it, without any testing shortages, only confirms that.

Furthermore, their proactive policy, is likely to have decreased the fatality as they were able to more effectively allocate resources and better prevent the most at-risk from getting it in the first place.

Despite all of that they still have a 2.2% (and likely to rise still) CFR. So just to get to a 1% IFR, that means 2.2 times as many people had it then tested, and therefore, they only tested 45.2% of the actually cases. That may be plausible, but even missing 55% of the cases seems pretty hard to do given their data.