4 ms·

This is not true of Delta strain. Younger people, under 30, and children are getting it and ending up in hospital. It’s widely reported here in Australia. Ch

This is not true of Delta strain. Younger people, under 30, and children are getting it and ending up in hospital. It’s widely reported here in Australia. Children are at risk.

colordrops 5y ago
Data please.
jtbayly 5y ago
It's widely reported in the US, too. But the data doesn't bear it out.
- shakna 5y ago
  The vast majority [0] of cases in Victoria are for the 20-29 age group. There are as many cases for the 10-19 age group as the 40-49 age group. The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. Whilst there isn't a current breakdown of mortality by age rate, the overall mortality rate for Victoria is 4%, meaning that there is a high risk to children. The data does bear out the risk. [0] https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-covid-19-data#cases-by-age-group-and-gender https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-cov...
  - jtbayly 5y ago
    > The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. Either I can't read graphs, or you can't. And you absolutely cannot take the overall mortality rate and apply it to the one age group we know practically none have died from in the past. So, as I said, the data doesn't bear this out so far as I've seen.
    - shakna 5y ago
      > Either I can't read graphs, or you can't. That would be _you_. Here's the numbers from said active case graph. + 0-9 - 112 + 10-19 - 100 + 20-29 - 78 + 30-39 - 105 + 40-49 - 54 + 50-59 - 25 + 60-69 - 14 + 70-79 - 3 + 80-89 - 1
      - 22c 5y ago
        The Victorian government data you linked is very unclear. It treats cases in aged care vs. not in aged care as separate sets, but is not clear on whether or not hospitalisation cases come from both sets. At the top of the page it says "cases in hospital by age" but I can't seem to find any reference to the age of those people in hospital. What's clear to me, though, is in the age group of 0-29 there's been a total of 1 death in Victoria. It's not a whole lot to go on, but it seems unlikely to me that many in the 0-29 group require hospital treatment.
      - jtbayly 5y ago
        Just to be clear, you said: > The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. And then you shared data that shows 0-9 age group with less than 30%. Since we apparently agree on how to read the chart, I can only assume the words “vast majority” were not what you meant.
  - nradov 5y ago
    A mortality rate of 4% in Victoria is obviously wrong. The only way to get a number that high is to ignore all the asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic cases. US CDC data shows a mortality rate of only 0.6%, and that's mostly from earlier in the pandemic before vaccines were available. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...
shakna 5y ago
> Younger people, under 30, and children are getting it and ending up in hospital. To emphasise this point, in Victoria, Australia, most of the cases are in the 20-29 age group. Most of the active cases are in the 0-9 age group.[0] NSW data doesn't have the pretty graphs, but the raw data [1] bears out similar groupings. [0] https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-covid-19-data#cases-by-age-group-and-gender https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-cov... [1] https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/nsw-covid-19-cases-by-age-range https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/nsw-covid-19-cases-by-a...
- MontyCarloHall 5y ago
  Your first link reports that out of the thousands of total cases, only 20 are in the hospital, 9 of which are in the ICU. This does not support the claim that young people are "widely" ending up in the hospital from COVID. A COVID case != serious illness, especially in vaccinated individuals. We need to stop pretending that they are equivalent.
  - shakna 5y ago
    > Your first link reports that out of the thousands of total cases, only 20 are in the hospital, 9 of which are in the ICU. My first link reports 492 total active cases, not thousands. If you want to use the total cases, then you should be noting that 820 people have died, and 20,212 have recovered. The mortality calculated from that is a simple 3.8%. 20 hospitalised cases out of 492 total active cases, is about 4%, and the 9 in ICU are about 2% of total active cases.
    - MontyCarloHall 5y ago
      >My first link reports 492 total active cases, not thousands. You are correct, I was looking at total cases, not active cases. My apologies! However, this still does not support the claim that young people are "widely" going to the hospital. Even assuming that age ranges are going to the hospital at equal rates (which is a preposterous assumption), given 20 total hospitalizations spread across 492 active cases (of which 290 are ages 0-29), we would only expect ~11/290 active COVID cases under 30 to be hospitalized. But again, this an extremely unrealistic upper bound, based on the ludicrous assumption that all ages get hospitalized at equal rates. On top of that, these data are from Australia, where the population is still not widely vaccinated. I assume the vast majority of hospitalized COVID patients in Victoria are not fully vaccinated. >The mortality calculated from that is a simple 3.8%. This (and all previous calculations) depend on accurately estimating the denominator, i.e. the total number of cases. Given the amount of asymptomatic/low symptomatic cases, how is this accurately done? Has the composition of who gets tested shifted over the course of the pandemic? Has it ever actually accurately sampled the true number of cases?

This is not true of Delta strain. Younger people, under 30, and children are getting it and ending up in hospital. It’s widely reported here in Australia. Children are at risk.

colordrops 5y ago

Data please.

jtbayly 5y ago

It's widely reported in the US, too. But the data doesn't bear it out.

shakna 5y ago
The vast majority [0] of cases in Victoria are for the 20-29 age group. There are as many cases for the 10-19 age group as the 40-49 age group. The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. Whilst there isn't a current breakdown of mortality by age rate, the overall mortality rate for Victoria is 4%, meaning that there is a high risk to children. The data does bear out the risk. [0] https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-covid-19-data#cases-by-age-group-and-gender https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-cov...
- jtbayly 5y ago
  > The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. Either I can't read graphs, or you can't. And you absolutely cannot take the overall mortality rate and apply it to the one age group we know practically none have died from in the past. So, as I said, the data doesn't bear this out so far as I've seen.
  - shakna 5y ago
    > Either I can't read graphs, or you can't. That would be _you_. Here's the numbers from said active case graph. + 0-9 - 112 + 10-19 - 100 + 20-29 - 78 + 30-39 - 105 + 40-49 - 54 + 50-59 - 25 + 60-69 - 14 + 70-79 - 3 + 80-89 - 1
    - 22c 5y ago
      The Victorian government data you linked is very unclear. It treats cases in aged care vs. not in aged care as separate sets, but is not clear on whether or not hospitalisation cases come from both sets. At the top of the page it says "cases in hospital by age" but I can't seem to find any reference to the age of those people in hospital. What's clear to me, though, is in the age group of 0-29 there's been a total of 1 death in Victoria. It's not a whole lot to go on, but it seems unlikely to me that many in the 0-29 group require hospital treatment.
    - jtbayly 5y ago
      Just to be clear, you said: > The vast majority of currently active cases right now are for the 0-9 age group. And then you shared data that shows 0-9 age group with less than 30%. Since we apparently agree on how to read the chart, I can only assume the words “vast majority” were not what you meant.
- nradov 5y ago
  A mortality rate of 4% in Victoria is obviously wrong. The only way to get a number that high is to ignore all the asymptomatic or paucisymptomatic cases. US CDC data shows a mortality rate of only 0.6%, and that's mostly from earlier in the pandemic before vaccines were available. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...

shakna 5y ago

> Younger people, under 30, and children are getting it and ending up in hospital. To emphasise this point, in Victoria, Australia, most of the cases are in the 20-29 age group. Most of the active cases are in the 0-9 age group.[0] NSW data doesn't have the pretty graphs, but the raw data [1] bears out similar groupings. [0] https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-covid-19-data#cases-by-age-group-and-gender https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-cov... [1] https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/nsw-covid-19-cases-by-age-range https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/nsw-covid-19-cases-by-a...

MontyCarloHall 5y ago
Your first link reports that out of the thousands of total cases, only 20 are in the hospital, 9 of which are in the ICU. This does not support the claim that young people are "widely" ending up in the hospital from COVID. A COVID case != serious illness, especially in vaccinated individuals. We need to stop pretending that they are equivalent.
- shakna 5y ago
  > Your first link reports that out of the thousands of total cases, only 20 are in the hospital, 9 of which are in the ICU. My first link reports 492 total active cases, not thousands. If you want to use the total cases, then you should be noting that 820 people have died, and 20,212 have recovered. The mortality calculated from that is a simple 3.8%. 20 hospitalised cases out of 492 total active cases, is about 4%, and the 9 in ICU are about 2% of total active cases.
  - MontyCarloHall 5y ago
    >My first link reports 492 total active cases, not thousands. You are correct, I was looking at total cases, not active cases. My apologies! However, this still does not support the claim that young people are "widely" going to the hospital. Even assuming that age ranges are going to the hospital at equal rates (which is a preposterous assumption), given 20 total hospitalizations spread across 492 active cases (of which 290 are ages 0-29), we would only expect ~11/290 active COVID cases under 30 to be hospitalized. But again, this an extremely unrealistic upper bound, based on the ludicrous assumption that all ages get hospitalized at equal rates. On top of that, these data are from Australia, where the population is still not widely vaccinated. I assume the vast majority of hospitalized COVID patients in Victoria are not fully vaccinated. >The mortality calculated from that is a simple 3.8%. This (and all previous calculations) depend on accurately estimating the denominator, i.e. the total number of cases. Given the amount of asymptomatic/low symptomatic cases, how is this accurately done? Has the composition of who gets tested shifted over the course of the pandemic? Has it ever actually accurately sampled the true number of cases?