This is just a no true Scotsman argument in disguise. To wit, anyone who is young and healthy won't die from corona, therefore anyone young who died from it wasn't "really" healthy and had "unknown" issues.
You can make that argument with any illness, and people do. E.g., you can't get cancer if you eat healthy, oh, you got cancer? You must not have been eating the right diet for your body type.
It's not a fallacy it's a very simple statement. Cancer was probably the worst example for your case as its something that can develop in-spite of being healthy and as far as we know it is not caused by a virus.
Most people who contracted covid, 99.9% of them, are fine. Of those that have died, 100% seem to have had some underlying issue. You're acting as though it's unreasonable to account for comorbidities when determining the cause of death.
From the link above, the immunocompromised are a reservoir for the virus for a longer time, since it takes longer for the body to clear the virus. So certainly worth the extra attention, from an epidemiological standpoint if nothing else.
My sense is the immunocompromised would know the COVID response drill from all the other infectious agents they have to deal with so, maybe, they are more careful anyway, but…
The puzzling thing is (from the Johns Hopkins link) there are 15M immunocompromised in the US.
Which does beg the question: if COVID is truly a superbug, two years on, why aren’t they (the immunocompromised) dead yet?
A death rate of only 6%, over two years, for this highly vulnerable immunocompromised population would explain all the US deaths from COVID.
How can COVID be simultaneously
(1) the Plague of the Century and,
(2) two years on, also leave 94% to 99+% of the most vulnerable alive (depending on your assumption on the percentage of symptomatic/hospitalized/fatal COVID cases who are/were immunocompromised)?
For severely immunocompromised individuals (I'm a transplant recipient, so can speak to that), the CFR for COVID is anywhere between 20-35%. There's also a lot more attention paid to avoiding viruses even when there's not a global pandemic, so they are far more likely to be careful, and their IFR is probably much, much closer to their CFR due to being routinely monitored probably more than any other group (I have biweekly blood work and my blood is screened for some viruses every month, I take my vitals literally every day).
"Immunocompromised" as a category includes a very wide range of people, and someone who's on a small temporary prednisone prescription is far less immunocompromised than a chemotherapy patient, solid organ transplant recipient, or HIV+ individual.
Maybe because those of us in that subpopulation aren't treating it by sticking our heads in the sand, and actually doing the stuff that works - not going out, wearing a (good) mask when we must, getting our shots...
Immunocompromised is not a binary term. Allergies to gluten are an autoimmune disorder. Arthritis can be an autoimmune disorder. A lot of these are minor.
One third of Americans are clinically obese alone. Half are over 40. What percentage of people actually fit your "young and fully healthy" criteria? Are we meant to be comforted by this?
