It doesn't give you the mortality rates because there are millions more that are asymptomatic who are NOT being tested. Why they are using a test that is only suppose to be used for research purposes or the newer one, that looks more and more like the falsified antibody test we saw with Borreliosis, illustrates a clear conflict of interest. And what is the criteria to report these cases, for this website?

The asymptomatic cases is what is most important and if over 90% of those infected become asymptomatic, and dozens of studies have illustrated this, even Fauci himself has made this clear a month ago, then the mortality rate is WELL UNDER 1% for those 45 years and younger. Again, your link does NOT take into account asymtomatic cases, which number far greater than symptomatic cases, nor does it take into account infection rate in endemic areas of .11% or age groups.

In your livescience link there is no mention of asymptomatic cases.

Though the death rate for COVID-19 is unclear, most research suggests it is higher than that of the seasonal flu.

And indeed, it is, but they continue to conclude it is well over 1% by throwing out or disregarding asymptomatic patients, who will not come in and get tested.

The article does not link many of the studies they appear to be quoting from, so we have to take their word for it.

The CDC says this:

Therefore, mass serologic surveillance and surveys to assess the presence or absence of symptoms is strongly recommended to disentangle the threat of emerging infectious diseases, including COVID-19.

So:

In addition, because our estimates of CFR are based on the number of confirmed cases reported before the February 12 change in the case definition.

Basically, the mortality rate is flimsy at this time, and surely teh CDC when it came to Borreliosis was confident in their numbers, that's why they lied for thirty years.