One thing that report does not consider as far as I can see is the amount of covid exposure to the individual infected I have read quite a few of these type of reports a number seem to indicate level of covid exposure at the time of infection is also key.
Yes, it's just considering general risk of death by age and gender as far as I can tell. Also he's careful to point out it's not considering other factors like other long term consequences of catching the disease.
I thought the distinction between IFR and PFR was useful, and is often missed in news items as the article points out:
- The risks of dying from COVID-19, among people who get it (known as the Infection Fatality Rate IFR ).
- The risk of dying from COVID-19, among people who do not currently have it (known as the Population Fatality Rate PFR).
If the article is correct, it would confirm that there is virtually no mortality risk to younger children in sending them back to school. From the article "For under 15s, the possibility of COVID added a negligible fatal risk." However, I would assume there would be increased risk of mortality among older people (teachers, parents and the wider community) if open schools contribute to the general spread.
Devil's advocate: It all suggests nasty questions about how long younger people's lives should be put on hold to save their elders. It could be argued the young are currently sacrificing their liberty for the old - so at what point should it be reversed in the interests of fairness? Should older people accept confinement at some point in order to let younger people live more normally?