[quote tinselearedcow]I am not sure if I am wasting my time posting this but I will anyway. Have a look at the IFR by age and how from 35+ it begins to rise steeply.
Age group (years) Infection Fatality Rate
0-34 0.004%
35-44 0.068%
45-54 0.23%
55-64 0.75%
65-74 2.5%
75-84 8.5%
85+ 28.3%
Yes, the risk still looks small until you get to 65+ , but to me it seems clear that if we gave the virus free rein and millions are infected many, many more people of all ages would get ill enough to be in hospital. Many of them would go on to die. Other non-covid patients would also die because they wouldn't be able to get the life saving treatment they need.
This is not about the young vs the old, this is about all of us, IMHO.
Source for table: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00698-1/tables/3[/quote]
The risk at 35-44 is still lower than flu, though.
Covid mostly kills the elderly and those with metabolic problems - if you're 55-64 and in good health your chance of dying will be much lower. It's just that 2/3rds of 55-64 year old will be obese, which is where a lot of the problems lie.
We've known who is at risk for a long time.
The sensible plan would have been to furlough/wfh the at-risk groups along with those who live/care for them, keep social distancing in essential shops, and offer safe socialisation opportunities to those groups, whilst letting everyone else live freely and help make sure that there's a country worth coming back to.
True, the numbers involved could well mean that we end up with 3/4 of the country in voluntary lockdown, but I don't see how that would be worse than what we're doing.