Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

That 38% figure is not relevent in this context, because it does not control for the demographics of the population in general. 45% of admisions are over 65, despite the fact that >65 makes up only 16% of the total population [0].

Further, according the the underlying report, of the 22-44 year olds admitted to the hospital, only 2-4% went to the ICU. The 75–84 bracket had 11%–31% admitance to the ICU.

Of the deaths reported, 80% were over 65, while the other 20% was 20–64.

Yes, this virus can kill anyone, but statiscally speeking, it is far more likely to kill you when you are old. If there is a limited supply of a protective messure, we should prioritize giving it to the far more vulnerable.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Sta...




So you get to decide that risking death for a 70 year old is worse than risking permanent lung damage for a 30 year old?


Agree with your point (that raw % of hospitalizations is misleading), but it's 2-4% of total positive cases, not 2-4% of those admitted to hospital.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: