3 ms·

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...

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...