[Goose]

Yes, but we know there is a large population that carries the virus without developing the infection. The Chinese report as many as 1/3 of population tested for the virus were positive with no symptoms.
...
Probably goes for a large percentage of the population.

Maybe, but it seems improbable to me that say 1/3 of the general population of Italy has been exposed to the virus, carried it, expressed no symptoms, could pass it on, and only 0.1% of the population so far is actually "sick". If you said even 1% of the population was in that category, it is still hard to understand how only 0.1% of the population actually got sick and did so quickly. I suspect that in pockets of active disease it could be true that 1/3 of the population has actually carried the virus, but not in the general population.

[Goose]

Yes, but we know there is a large population that carries the virus without developing the infection. The Chinese report as many as 1/3 of population tested for the virus were positive with no symptoms.
...
Probably goes for a large percentage of the population.

Maybe, but it seems improbable to me that say 1/3 of the general population of Italy has been exposed to the virus, carried it, expressed no symptoms, could pass it on, and only 0.1% of the population so far is actually "sick". If you said even 1% of the population was in that category, it is still hard to understand how only 0.1% of the population actually got sick and did so quickly. I suspect that in pockets of active disease it could be true that 1/3 of the population has actually carried the virus, but not in the general population.