Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

The Nice People No. 17

Options
194959799100115

Comments

  • ukcarper
    ukcarper Posts: 17,337 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    GDB2222 said:
    ukcarper said:
    GDB2222 said:
    ukcarper said:
    GDB2222 said:
    Neither of the kids will need an ICU bed. Kids are very good at spreading the virus to parents and grandma though.
    Death rate for 10-19 year olds is 0.2%, 2 in a thousand approx 2 in normal comp school. OK not everybody is going to get it so probably lower but still high enough to think about.
    The death rates quoted are for people who are diagnosed. Most kids are non-symptomatic, so they are not diagnosed. There’s a strong relationship by age both as to whether you are likely to show any significant symptoms and, if you do, whether you are likely to get pneumonia.  


    fatality rates are estimated and are pretty basic, I believe the ones I'm quoting (from worldmeters) are from cases in Wuhan and 0.2 children 10 to 19 years who have been tested have died, no one under 10 has died. But as I said figures are probably lower as not everybody will get it or have been test come to that and I still believe that it shouldn't be ignored completely. 

    What you have said is how I understand it, except that I interpret it a bit differently.

    The Wuhan data was from the 55000 people who were tested, but only people who were severely ill got tested. So, I agree that the Chinese data shows 2 per thousand 10-19 year olds dying, or two per comprehensive school as you put it. BUT, that's only amongst those who got ill enough in the first place to get tested in Wuhan. If in that age group only 1 in 100 gets that ill, say, then the number of deaths in that age group goes down to 2 per 100 comprehensive schools. 

    I think that youngsters have some innate idea that they are bulletproof, anyway, but in this particular case they probably have a point. Not that the thought of youngsters (or anyone) dying in this way is good, but I think it goes some way to explaining why that age group are so relaxed about it. 

    I agree the risk to children is thankfully very small and I wouldn't expect children to worry, it's their parents responsibility to ensure they are adhering to social distancing rules, if not for their own sake but everybody else's.  The present advice from government might well be enough to slow advance of virus if people follow it religiously but they are not and most likely will not and we most likely will soon be in total lock down.  Still need a break from this so I going to try and finish our puzzle. 
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.