Which is a very important measure, almost important as death rate by age group. One thing I see left out of reports is concurrent medical issues. Are the increased younger hospitalized COVID patients healthy or do they have the same medical issues (HTN/DM/obesity) If they are truly young and healthy that would be a much bigger concern.
Yes I will be fine because I can read the studies know what the important questions are and where to find the answers.
Ha, classic @gator95, disagreeing with my question. I asked a question because I am genuinely seeking an answer and I know many here have stats and charts already lined up. I asked a freaking question man, answer it if you can tell me why I’m wrong.
Well, I guess the kids were lucky they didn't get sent into nursing homes. Only the elderly and Covid-19+ patients are allowed in nursing homes. No kids.
I trust big networks and news agencies to make decisions based on their mission statement, economics and the expectations of their customers. All of which differs by institution. If any or all institutions fail to find it newsworthy, I will not conclude that they are having secret meetings to make me unhappy. On the practical side, it might be unwise to report on variances in the time series. Also, what are they to report? “A 3 month low! We don’t know if it’s just noise or meaningful. If it’s meaningful in the light of new positives, we don’t know why. It might change tomorrow. Thank you for watching.” Lastly, you don't have to resort to spectral analysis to see the periodic behavior of deaths in the US (see below). It's obvious that the last nine Sundays have represented lower lows. Is that really qualify as "BREAKING NEWS!"?
According to the latest Florida DOH numbers, 19 % of all cases and 52% of hospitalizations are 65+ years old. That same group now accounts for 86% of deaths. Under 24 years old is 17%, 2% and 0% in the same categories.
Infected young folks get sick less than old folks even though there are more of them. Infected old folks get sick more than young folks even though there are less of them. If 20% of hospitalizations are from the young, but the young get sick much less by % than that chart tells us there is a very high number of asymptomatic young people. Again, that is from March. We have always known the younger people are infected more often due to lifestyle. They are just not affected as severely.
It's nothing like that at all. I have been screaming for more testing. I just said poor testing early was our problem. But we are also improving care. We are improving contact tracing. Some reports of the virus maybe weakening as it mutates. (nothing concrete of course)....many reasons for optimism that do not require "SLOW THE TESTING". C'mon man. Read what I said, not what you twist my words into saying.
Thank you, that’s all I was asking for. So the infection rate is comparable while the hospitalization and deaths are so low they’re not even comparable. That is positive news, hey, positive news! It does shoot down my concern that deaths and hospitalization of 24 and under could be a product of low cases, not a higher immunity.
Ok, cool, just because you knew it since March, doesn’t mean I did, thus the question. I still don’t agree with your explanation, but thanks for trying!
Here is the thing, and we agree on why they do it btw. Ratings are king, I get that. They have ALWAYS told us when we hit a new high. I think folks are just wanting balance and common sense in the coverage. Good news is helpful to the psyche of the nation. Of course it could spike. Report on it when it does. I think that is all most folks are asking for.
I was not aiming the March thing at you. I was just showing that the info is not new. It is a fact. Older people get this thing less than younger folks. They do however take it much worse than younger folks....and you just agreed with @littlebluelw for saying the same thing I am.
I agree people could use good news. But unfortunately it's a double-edge sword. It's what they do with the info. We have way to many ignorant people that refuse to do the right things. You tell them it doesn't usually impact the young as harshly and they're out their "YOLO BABY!" acting like there is nothing going on. A lot of your commentary I would agree with if everyone was responsible and did the right things. But unfortunately that is not the case. For that segment, I think you need to scare the $hi+ out of them instead of giving them a ray of sunshine to abuse. The messaging from the top has never scared anybody to attention. Rules and restrictions aren't for the responsible, they are for the irresponsible. Of which we have way more than our fair share.
Instead of only looking at the death rate; there should be a consideration of those hospitalized. Thats the metric I follow. For fla....
The number of "recovered" patients that have lasting significant lung damage is scary. Almost need to go to war-like terms of deaths and casualties.
I have not seen this. I have seen that there are cases with severe lung damage, but I read an article recently that said other coronaviruses that have years of follow up studies show less long term permanent effects then feared and that Covid-19 is way to new to have any idea. Even the severe damage is mostly limited to those with existing conditions. I am not trying to say you are wrong, just asking for data that shows "lasting significant" damage that rises to a scary level.
Have no idea of the numbers or % on how it effects different groups. But lots of reports of people with reduced lung function which is significant quality of life issue. Not necessarily holding out hopes for a vaccine. But hope they can come about some treatment protocols that can minimize the damage of this ASAP. I think that is our real only chance at a return to somewhat normalcy.
Agree. The stories of some of the long term damage to otherwise healthy young people are alarming but not nearly enough data to draw conclusions. The stories are alarming enough that I take the disease seriously, just not enough to jump to conclusions.
