Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by vannevar 2222 days ago
The mortality rate is not the only consideration. People don't want to die, sure, but they also don't want to spend a couple of weeks in the hospital. And that risk, even for those under 65, is much, much higher: at least 1 in 100 (Source:https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page).

Not only do individuals not want to spend time in the hospital, we as a society don't want them there either. Assuming we need 60% of the population to recover in order to achieve herd immunity, and assuming we somehow isolate all of our 65+ year olds from the virus, that would mean almost 2M hospitalizations in the US.

1 comments

I can't find hospitalizations broken out by underlying illnesses, but if among each age bracket we assume the % of deaths associated with underlying illness holds as the % of hospitalizations associated with underlying illness, then we get a "healthy under 65" Hospitalization Rate of 0.3% to 0.5%.

Under 65:

7.4M people

1.55M infected

26,000 hospitalizations

4,548 "healthy" hospitalizations (16% of deaths under 65 have no comorbidities. Using same rate here).

800k-1.2M infected w/o comorbidities depending on "healthy rate"

4,548 / 1M = 0.45%

Good point. I was assuming using the rate per capita would be best case, but you're right, you'd also need underlying illness rates. I think the point stands though, that hospitalization rates for otherwise healthy patients under 65 is an order of magnitude higher than their mortality rate.