4 ms·

Scared people don't care about probabilities. We have known for months that the IFR is <0.01% for people under 40 and even lower for children, youth, and young

Scared people don't care about probabilities. We have known for months that the IFR is <0.01% for people under 40 and even lower for children, youth, and young adults. Yet they still blabber that everyone is in grave danger.

Jeema101 6y ago
>We have known for months that the IFR is <0.01% I don't think that's quite correct (in the US anyway), but if you have evidence otherwise feel free to share it. * 2,046 people age 35 and under have died of Covid-19 in the US as of Oct 10. [1] * People under 35 constitute 49.5% of the population in the US. [2] * An estimated 9.3% of the population has antibodies as of September [3] 330,00,000 x .49.5 x .093 = 15.2 million people in the < 35 year old age group infected as of September. Maybe 16.7 million now with the increase in cases since then, so: .012% IFR for people < 35 years old (obviously it would be higher - probably about double I would guess - if you did people 40 and under) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_Unite... [2] https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics [3] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/09/less-10-us-population-has-covid-19-antibodies-data-show https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/09/less-10-...
- anoncake 6y ago
  That was a typo, sorry. I meant to write <0.02%, which is still nothing to worry about.
- mikem170 6y ago
  >.012% IFR for people < 35 years old Thanks for running those numbers. I wonder if you and I would disagree on the significance of the .012% IFR that you calculated? I started a reply with some feedback, mentioning one of the t-cell studies showing that several times as many people may have immunity than you are showing [0], and also that somewhere between 80-95% of the dead in the < 35 age group had comorbidities [1], which improves the odds a lot if you don't have comorbidities. But even using your < 35 numbers, .012% is about 1 in 8000 odds of dying after infection, and I don't see that as statistically significant (EDIT: corrected wording). I guess the reason I say this is that I would not want 6-18 months of my social and/or economic life to be upended by something that only has a 1 in 8,000 chance of happening. I'm running on worse odd than that, being over 35. I take some precautions, and want to be considerate to those more worried about their odds, but I'd much rather not give up a large percentage of the precious time I have left in this world hiding from something that has less than a one in a thousand chance happening to me. Rather than quibble over numbers I'm curious if you interpret the same numbers differently? Do you think 1 in 8000 is statistically significant? [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2598-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2598-9 [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...

Jeema101 6y ago

>We have known for months that the IFR is <0.01% I don't think that's quite correct (in the US anyway), but if you have evidence otherwise feel free to share it. * 2,046 people age 35 and under have died of Covid-19 in the US as of Oct 10. [1] * People under 35 constitute 49.5% of the population in the US. [2] * An estimated 9.3% of the population has antibodies as of September [3] 330,00,000 x .49.5 x .093 = 15.2 million people in the < 35 year old age group infected as of September. Maybe 16.7 million now with the increase in cases since then, so: .012% IFR for people < 35 years old (obviously it would be higher - probably about double I would guess - if you did people 40 and under) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_the_Unite... [2] https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics [3] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/09/less-10-us-population-has-covid-19-antibodies-data-show https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/09/less-10-...

anoncake 6y ago
That was a typo, sorry. I meant to write <0.02%, which is still nothing to worry about.
mikem170 6y ago
>.012% IFR for people < 35 years old Thanks for running those numbers. I wonder if you and I would disagree on the significance of the .012% IFR that you calculated? I started a reply with some feedback, mentioning one of the t-cell studies showing that several times as many people may have immunity than you are showing [0], and also that somewhere between 80-95% of the dead in the < 35 age group had comorbidities [1], which improves the odds a lot if you don't have comorbidities. But even using your < 35 numbers, .012% is about 1 in 8000 odds of dying after infection, and I don't see that as statistically significant (EDIT: corrected wording). I guess the reason I say this is that I would not want 6-18 months of my social and/or economic life to be upended by something that only has a 1 in 8,000 chance of happening. I'm running on worse odd than that, being over 35. I take some precautions, and want to be considerate to those more worried about their odds, but I'd much rather not give up a large percentage of the precious time I have left in this world hiding from something that has less than a one in a thousand chance happening to me. Rather than quibble over numbers I'm curious if you interpret the same numbers differently? Do you think 1 in 8000 is statistically significant? [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2598-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2598-9 [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-se...