As you have often told others, please let's stick to the data, and not give your own 'batshot crazy' ideas airtime either.
My post included data. Yours had none. I'm not going to apologise for observing that people are generally impressionable and easily led by superficially appealing ideas.
I'm getting worried about the agenda here, there have been innumerable studies highlighting the risk to BAME and yet the risk is constantly dismissed on this thread.
There is no 'agenda here', since this is a data-driven thread on a parenting website it doesn't have an agenda per se. That doesn't mean nobody posting has an agenda, including me or you, but in general we can all post our opinions here providing they have supporting data.
That's the whole point of this. Not that 'nobody is allowed to have an opinion', but that we should have opinions that are informed by facts. The same facts, or a different selection of them, may inform completely opposite opinions, and we are likely to selectively ignore or amplify those facts that confirm our own, but that's unavoidable. Let's not pretend that science is apolitical, as it never has been.
Returning to the topic of data after your derail, here's the latest ONS study on ethnicity, religion, disability & covid-19 deaths:
www.ons.gov.uk/releases/coronaviruscovid19relatedmortalitybyreligionethnicityanddisabilityenglandandwales2march2020to15may2020
It shows the (93.6% white-identifying) Jewish males as having been most likely to die of all religious people.
After adjusting for "population density, region, rural and urban classification, area deprivation, household composition, socio-economic position, highest qualification held, household tenure, household exposure, and self-reported health and disability"
the excess risk was 95% for Jewish males, 42% for Muslim males, 16% for Sikh males, 36% for Hindu males and small are negative for other reigious groups.
White Jews were slightly more likely to die than non-white Jews, though this might not be statistically significant.
It's not possible to distinguish Islam, Sikhism and Hinduism from their corresponding most common ethnic groups, not least because more than 90% of British Bangladeshis/Pakistanis identify as Muslim.
I pointed out that the BBC was pushing the 'ethnicity' theory hard while ignoring religion in this previous thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/a3905548-Daily-numbers-graphs-analysis-thread-8?msgid=96710071#96710071
I am not sure what it says about us if we are prepared to believe that the cultural and/or religious practices of Jews put them at risk, not some inherent theory about 'Jews as a race', yet at the same time we want to insist that 'ethnicity' is inherently a risk factor for non-white people.
I'm not really sure where you are going with the 'risk to BAME' people thing. Do you mean that 'BAME people' have some inherent genetic defect that makes them more likely to die from covid-19? It's fact that for example Bangladeshi males are many times more likely than white males to work as a taxi/minicab driver. But that doesn't mean a Bangladeshi taxi driver is more likely to die from his job than a white taxi driver.
In total the ONS study considers 37,956 deaths, of which 88.6% were white, as against 86.4% of the underlying population. 31,000 of the deaths were old (65+) and white .
The ONS found that when adjusting for region, population density, area deprivation, household composition, socio-economic position, highest qualification held, household tenure, multigenerational household flags and occupation indicators, that there was no statistically significant excess risk for Pakistani & Bangladeshi women, a small excess for Indian women (14% ±12%), and a larger risk for black women (41% ±13%).
For males there was around a 50% excess risk for South Asian men, and a 103% excess risk for black men.
The ONS conclude:
"We find that differences across ethnic groups alter across age groups. The differences in mortality risk are larger for younger (people aged under 70 years) than older people"
"This could be partly explained by the greater likelihood of this population being economically active and in employment; although we account for some measures of occupational exposure, an imbalance across ethnic groups in likelihood to be working in at-risk occupations, such as front-facing occupations, could be a determining factor yet to be explored in detail with additional data sources."
also
"we have found evidence that the ethnic differences are more pronounced among the groups that are at lower risk of dying of COVID-19. "
and
"We found that the differences across ethnic groups were more pronounced among those who were not key workers. "
and
"that differences in the risk of death between ethnic minority groups and the White population tend to be larger among non-deprived households and those with a degree. "
i.e. poor white people are relatively closer to poor BAME people in terms of risk, while richer BAME people are more at risk than richer white people, and the excess risk for BAME people is much smaller for older people (who are at highest risk).
It seems that younger South Asian men & black people generally are more likely to have died than younger white people, but young people in general are at low risk. The overwhelming risk is to old people, who are more likely to be white than the population as a whole. Exactly why Jewish men, younger South Asian men, and black people are more likely to have died is not clear.
But we still know with complete certainty that age is an inherent (biological) risk factor, while religion cannot possibly be, yet it also influences the likelihood someone has died.
It seems likely that different employment, diet, health, social practices etc. will have given different groups different risks of catching and then recovering from covid-19.
For example, it could be that Jewish men having a large excess risk of dying from covid-19 because they are more likely to have caught it. But we don't have data on that. We do know in general that men and women are equally likely to have covid-19. And then women are less likely to die from it. But this infection risk doesn't necessarily apply to sub-populations .