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

To be clear about this, you are saying that if you wrote down a list of 100 of your close relatives, friends and co-workers that are above 60 years of age, you would happily trade "2 years of having a non miserable life", for the high statistical chance that 10 randomly selected individuals from the list will die?

I think there is a cut-off at some point, but 10x more deaths is way above my threshold.




So, you're suggesting that 10% of all people over 60 years old died of Covid since this began? I would love to see you try to find me a source for this statistic.

I'll wait…


No, I am saying that roughly 1% of over-70s died of covid the last two years, then 10x that.


Then you should maybe look at the context of what's being said — I was replying to a comment about Norway trading it's "10x lower" covid death rate with Sweden — where 0.014% of people died of Covid.

Your numbers are beyond absurd. But let me quickly disprove it: this study[1] shows the infection fatality rate among patients 70 and older in Stockholm was 4.3%. So, even if every single person over 60 was infected and was actually 70+, then you'd still not have 10% of the people you know over 60 die.

But obviously, 60 year olds are not all 70+, so their rate is lower, and not everyone gets infected (in Sweden so far, only about 10% of the country got infected) — so in your ridiculous example, it's over 50% likely that not a single one of the 100 people you listed dies in this contrived scenario.

But please, show me the data that shows otherwise.

[1]: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/contentassets/53c0dc391b...




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

Search: