Can you help me understand why the case count isn't the denominator?
The posted numbers seem to imply that if 37k out of 100k kids had covid, 287 of them end up in the hospital. Does it not follow that if 100k out of 100k had covid that 775 kids would have been hospitalized?
> Granted we're probably way under counting infections in that age group
People get tested when they feel sick enough to be worried, there are many very minor and/or asymptomatic cases for which we won't have data. By using the positive case counts as the denominator you are using the most serious slice of cases to argue that coronavirus infections are serious.
I'm not sure that follows. That would imply that every kid has already had/been exposed to COVID and that's resulted in those per 100k numbers.
It's definitely not exact to use the infection as the denominator, but I'd argue it's much closer than using the 100k as the denominator. I think I stand by my original post.
The posted numbers seem to imply that if 37k out of 100k kids had covid, 287 of them end up in the hospital. Does it not follow that if 100k out of 100k had covid that 775 kids would have been hospitalized?