Is Corona really so dangerous for young people?

[Nichts]

I'm a bit confused. In Leo's latest blog post, he writes that 20% of severe cases are people between 20 and 44. This is the first time I'm hearing this info. What I've heard before is that Corona is mostly dangerous for old people and that most young people just get flu-like symptoms.

Any thoughts on this? Do you know some sources that I don't know which share these numbers?

Edited March 24, 2020 by Nichts
Corrected a typo in the title

[pluto]

Its nowhere near as dangerous as the media makes it. It will come and go and be forgotten soon enough, like all the other times these things have occurred. I have witnessed these patterns over and over again, they are the same things in different clothing.

Be in alignment with nature, with source, with the current of the great cosmic river and you cannot be affected.

Media = Mind/Ego this is keeping you blinded and in fear. When you are blind and in fear you are powerless and susceptible to dis-ease.

Disconnect from mind and tune within, tune with nature, there is an awakening that the ego does not want you to notice because it threatens its very nature.

You are the master, the mind is your servant, this is the correct relationship.

[Leo Gura]

 

[electroBeam]

Leo fucked up the stats... its not 1 in 5 people will get a severe case of coronavirus, 1 in 5 people WHO HAVE coronavirus will have severe symptoms.

If the coronavirus in your country is x, and your total population is y, then the chances you get coronavirus is x/y and the chances you get a severe case is 1/5 of that so x/y * 0.2

so if your population is 20 million, and there are 1000 cases, the chances you will get coronavirus is (1000/20000000) * 1/5 = 0.001% chance - which is ridiculously small.

The problem is, x is increasing exponentially, which means that 0.001% is increasing exponentially over time. 

[remember]

so 2.800.000 will get severe problems? i‘m not good in maths but that’s the number i get (correct me if wrong, no prob with that) in an estimation of 70% of population will get it in total in a small population of 20.000.000.

ah no - ok... it’s wrong. haven’t done that since years. can’t be right can it?

Edited March 24, 2020 by remember

[Nichts]

 

12 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

Leo fucked up the stats... its not 1 in 5 people will get a severe case of coronavirus, 1 in 5 people WHO HAVE coronavirus will have severe symptoms.

Yeah, I know that. I was surprised that exactly this number was this high. I thought that out of the people with the virus, the portion of people with severe symptoms would be smaller. Especially for young people. Because that's what I'm told from all sides: "You will most likely survive the virus but stay inside to protect the old and vulnerable"

[electroBeam]

13 minutes ago, Nichts said:

 

Yeah, I know that. I was surprised that exactly this number was this high. I thought that out of the people with the virus, the portion of people with severe symptoms would be smaller. Especially for young people. Because that's what I'm told from all sides: "You will most likely survive the virus but stay inside to protect the old and vulnerable"

nope its bs all people are affected. age is small factor. 

[purerogue]

36 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

Leo fucked up the stats... its not 1 in 5 people will get a severe case of coronavirus, 1 in 5 people WHO HAVE coronavirus will have severe symptoms.

If the coronavirus in your country is x, and your total population is y, then the chances you get coronavirus is x/y and the chances you get a severe case is 1/5 of that so x/y * 0.2

so if your population is 20 million, and there are 1000 cases, the chances you will get coronavirus is (1000/20000000) * 1/5 = 0.001% chance - which is ridiculously small.

The problem is, x is increasing exponentially, which means that 0.001% is increasing exponentially over time. 

So he fucked up because not everyone is infected yet, and chance that you will get corona virus in severe , or any  form is 0,001 % because  this virus does not spread? 

Edited March 24, 2020 by purerogue

[Nichts]

9 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

nope its bs all people are affected. age is small factor. 

Where did you get this information? This site which takes their numbers from the WHO, says otherwise: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

 

@Leo Gura I read the article. Couldn't find anything about it being that dangerous for young people. This site right here speaks of 5% severe or critical cases.

[Applegarden]

Here you go!

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

 

Edited March 24, 2020 by Applegarden

[intotheblack]

Yes young people are getting sick.  It's less likely that they will die from it,  but you can still get it and become critical.  Of course it all depends on that individual and the strength of their immune system, or if they have any underlying health issues.  The main issue is that you can get it and not have any symptoms therefore passing it on to others without realising it.   

We have to face the fact that nobody really knows anything yet, and the stats are different in each country regarding age and gender.  It's too early to say, everything is speculation.  

[electroBeam]

55 minutes ago, Nichts said:

Where did you get this information? This site which takes their numbers from the WHO, says otherwise: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

Because if a hospital has 1 bed, and 2 people, they will pick the youngest one. Common sense. 

[intotheblack]

@electroBeam yes.  that's already the case in Italy that's why the death toll is so high. 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, electroBeam said:

Leo fucked up the stats... its not 1 in 5 people will get a severe case of coronavirus, 1 in 5 people WHO HAVE coronavirus will have severe symptoms.

You misread what I wrote. Go read it again carefully.

[Nichts]

@electroBeam This might be a factor that plays into it. And I don't think it's the only one. You saying that age effect is a small factor is speculation. I'm pretty sure that scientists take things like this into account when they calculate a death rate.

[Leo Gura]

The stat I quoted wasn't specifically from that article but from other places.

Severe cases seem to range from 10% to 20% for ages 20-44. Depends on which stats you pull from. Stats vary by country.

[electroBeam]

5 minutes ago, Nichts said:

@electroBeam  I'm pretty sure that scientists take things like this into account when they calculate a death rate.

Nope. Thats called interpretation. And you usually dont do that with stats unless you explicitly mention it.

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You misread what I wrote. Go read it again carefully.

True, my apologies.

@purerogue read my last paragraph carefully.

Edited March 24, 2020 by electroBeam

[Nichts]

5 minutes ago, electroBeam said:

Nope. Thats called interpretation. And you usually dont do that with stats unless you explicitly mention it.

You might have a point there. Still, I can't imagine that the media or scientists would hide or fail to report such an important fact. Why is every credible media source saying that it's not as lethal if you're young? There must be some other factor that we're not seeing here.

[mandyjw]

A high percentage of younger people are needing to be hospitalized, much more so than the flu. When hospitalized, they have much better chances of pulling through than those who are older.

This is the bottom line, if hospitals get flooded and overwhelmed, all statistics go out the window, and death rates skyrocket. 

[electroBeam]

1 minute ago, mandyjw said:

This is the bottom line, if hospitals get flooded and overwhelmed, all statistics go out the window, and death rates skyrocket. 

They dont go out the window hahaha.

But the stats are not representative of the bigger picture. If you want to analyse this seriously, you need to do a lot more research.