Here is one answer. Anyone have another factual answer?
According to the U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams, the average age of people dying from the virus in the U.S. is 80 years old.
31 Washington State elderly. That includes 27 in King County, (22 at the same elderly nursing facility in Kirkland), three in Snohomish county, and one in Grant County, a patient in their 80s.
4 California elderly: A woman in assisted living in her 90s, a hospitalized woman Santa Clara in her 60s, an “elderly man” in assisted living, and a 71-year-old man with underlying health conditions who’d been on a Grand Princess cruise ship.
2 Florida residents in their 70s who had traveled overseas.
1 New Jersey diabetic man, 69, who suffered two cardiac arrests.
1 South Dakota man aged 60-69, with “underlying medical conditions”
1 Georgia man, 67, with “underlying medical conditions”
*These numbers figured prior to new deaths over the weekend.
As you can see, the deaths have been the elderly, whether that brings you comfort or concern I don’t know, but it should at least give you the information you need to make the right decisions about what to do.
You’ll also notice for the most part that those who were younger (60s) who died had underlying medical conditions already. Over half of the deaths in the U.S. so far from coronavirus come from a single nursing facility
The US deaths I’m seeing posted are in the high 90s or over 100, with deaths and case rates up about 30% since yesterday. This might reflect increasing access to test kits. I don’t have an answer to your question, but in a week or so we’ll know a lot more. I remember at the beginning of the AIDS pandemic in the US. The public and politicians were trying to be reassuring about how it was only promiscuous urban gay men,* and were quite slow on the uptake about everyone else, or about looking at who was getting this disease outside the US.
*Offensively so, as if nobody they were talking about was a member of this group.
The first death in Texas was a 90 year old man in Matagorda County (SW of Houston along the Gulf).
But in my other thread, there’s a table (page 5) that shows the hospitalization rates, critical care rates and death rates by age. Unsurprisingly, it ramps up by age, especially after 60.
I’m guessing not enough people are infected just yet, or haven’t hit the critical stage yet.
The first death in Texas was a 90 year old man in Matagorda County (SW of Houston along the Gulf).
But in my other thread, there’s a table (page 5) that shows the hospitalization rates, critical care rates and death rates by age. Unsurprisingly, it ramps up by age, especially after 60.
I’m guessing not enough people are infected just yet, or haven’t hit the critical stage yet.
I think it is important to give out this type of information. You don’t want healthy 20 somethings thinking that they are going to die. If some people think that they are being “picked on” then that is nothing we are doing; it is what nature is doing.
It informs our strategy in this. Maybe your 85 year old father should be, well scared isn’t the right word, but he should take it far more seriously than an otherwise healthy 40 year old. Maybe for the short term, he should stay home and you can visit him on Facetime or Skype and drop groceries off at his front door.
I still contend that based on what we are seeing that there is no need for a wholesale shutdown of the economy. Let the kids have school, proms, and graduation. Just know not to go over and visit grandma while this is going on. Keep the restaurants and bars open, but grandma, don’t you go out until this blows over. No visits to nursing homes or hospitals: set up Skype or Facetime.
If you are 45, overweight, have diabetes and previous heart issues, then you stay home from work and stay away from others. Likewise if you are 25 and healthy but just came back from Italy. The government should help you with sick pay at this time. I’m a conservative but not an anarchist. People need to largely calm.the.fuck.down or we will head into a depression.
Focusing on deaths is a mistake. You need to look at who is going to the hospital, especially who ends up in the ICU (bump linked to this info). In that analysis, 3% in the 30-39 range needed hospitalization, 5% of them needed critical care, and 0.08% died. For 40-49, 5% needed hospitalization, 6% of them were critical, and 0.15% died.
The problem is that once the system starts to get overwhelmed, all those hospitalizations have much poorer outcomes. And it won’t take a huge percentage of the population to be infected before that happens. The fatality rate will not be a linear relation to number of infections.
Also note that this ignores all the other reasons people, both old and young, might need critical care. Suddenly those have worse outcomes as well because there are insufficient resources.
Since every single discussion of COVID-19, on the internet, on social media, in newspapers, and on television, has said from the beginning that the people most at risk are those over 60 and/or with certain underlying conditions, why should anyone be surprised that’s exactly what is happening?
Yeah, no. Did you read my example? While AIDS was still being called a disease of gay men, there were plenty of people in the US and the world dying of it who were not men having sex with men. The majority of HIV cases over time and in the world are not due to male-male sexual transmission.
Yes but are those numbers based on the % who were actually tested or actually sick? A large number of infected people have no symptoms, and some people who have symptoms don’t get tested.
So the share who need hospitalization or who die is probably lower than the numbers quoted.
Yes and there is growing concern how this will become a old vs young thing.
Well that makes sense when most of those hardest hit economically are young because they are the ones in service jobs like waiters or bartenders. Older people may already be retired and on pensions. I’ll look for it but one article said about Italy that while hundreds have died, none under age 29.
Now all the schools are closed, again this affects our youth.
There are no mentally normal healthy 20 somethings who are scared they are going to die from this. Some of them should, though. Those who have underlying medical conditions, for instance.
There are a LOT of mentally normal healthy 40 and 50-somethings are NOT scared, though. And these are the folks who are at risk for hospitalization. Especially if they have underlying medical conditions.
Hell, there are a lot of old people with underlying medical conditions who aren’t thinking they are going to die. Maybe we wouldn’t need to shut down everything if the people who are really at risk would listen to recommendations and stop galavanting around town.
I wonder if the reduction in driving and social gatherings will result in fewer hospitalizations for traffic accidents and other types of flu and communicable diseases. In the long term there might be more hospitalizations due to the dropoff in exercise but I don’t think that’s a medium-term concern.
According to this source, the median age of COVID-19 hospital patients in a Wuhan hospital was 47 years old.
I’m not guessing the median patient in the US will be over than 47, but it won’t be because the US is so awesome. It will be because we’ve been told to only go to the hospital when we think we’re fixin’ to die. There probably won’t be a whole lot of 40-somethings that will feel quite that bad. But there will probably be some who will come close to that point, but they will stay home and suffer.
AIDS was never a pandemic, it was never that widespread in this country, and it was much more deadly than Covid-19 for the first 15 years until effective treatments were found.
This is nothing like AIDS. AIDS is a disease that is difficult to spread and that was very, very deadly (until effective treatments were developed). Covid-19 is very easy to spread and is much less deadly than AIDS as a percentage of those who are exposed to it and those who actually develop symptoms.
Folks might as well get it into their heads that this is like nothing we’ve seen before, easier to catch than the flu, apparently, but with a mortality rate possibly as much as 10x higher than regular seasonal flu, especially among vulnerable groups. I know this thread started talking about identifying those vulnerable group, but it seems to have taken an unfortunate turn.
I probably should have said “not in this country” as my remarks re: something we haven’t seen before were addressed to that audience. In the first 36 years or so of the disease, 675,000 died from HIV in the US and about 1.2 million were living with HIV in 2016. In a population of 300 million, and with a disease where transmission is well understood and relatively easy to control, I don’t think that qualifies as a pandemic, as defined as affecting a significant portion of the population.
Please note that my remarks are in no way intended to diminish the awfulness of the history and toll of HIV. But I do prefer not to inflate the application of the severest possible terms to cases where they don’t apply.