Coronavirus

[Dave_Mole]

New guidance and documentation from the FRA:

https://fellrunner.org.uk/covid.php?...aNRQwle7qHrGAY

[Wheeze]

1% of those infected die which shows what a serious infection this is compared to the common cold. What the chart does not say is who makes up that 1%. Stats from first wave shows that in the UK 95% of deaths were in the over 80's and of the rest, most had other health issues. So risk of death for a healthy 45 yr old is minimal and certainly not 1%. What we dont know yet is the incidence of "long covid" and what the impact of that will be.

[Witton Park]

1% of those infected die which shows what a serious infection this is compared to the common cold. What the chart does not say is who makes up that 1%. Stats from first wave shows that in the UK 95% of deaths were in the over 80's and of the rest, most had other health issues. So risk of death for a healthy 45 yr old is minimal and certainly not 1%. What we dont know yet is the incidence of "long covid" and what the impact of that will be.

I wonder if the NHS are testing for anything else other than COVID when a patient with a respiratory condition is admitted. It isn't the only lurgy around.

[Fellbeast]

The other thing is that given that about half of people who get the virus have no symptoms, that means that it’s really only people with symptoms that get tested. So deaths will likely come in a c 2% of all positive tests. That sort of correlates given that there were 49 reported deaths yesterday with positive tests 4 weeks ago coming in at just over 2,000 each day.

So, somewhat pessimistically, of the 12,872 positive results yesterday it’s likely that 250 or so will die

[Fellbeast]

I wonder if the NHS are testing for anything else other than COVID when a patient with a respiratory condition is admitted. It isn't the only lurgy around.

But aren’t they now only counting deaths within 30 days - that surely means that deaths from COVID post 30 days are very likely to compensate any potential for error on the within 30 day deaths???

[Witton Park]

But aren’t they now only counting deaths within 30 days - that surely means that deaths from COVID post 30 days are very likely to compensate any potential for error on the within 30 day deaths???

Firstly, I'm sure you know the 12.872 results are correcting a reporting error and aren't yesterday. They go back in sonme cases to early September - and I know that doesn't change your calculation.

On the admissions, September is the start of the seasonal growth in respiratory conditions which usually peaks out in December.
It can be around 1,000 hospital admissions a day.
September 2015 saw 21,000 admissions for respiratory conditions.
What we are seeing isn't alarming in terms of numbers. BUt then you stick on the "with Covid" tag.

[Fellbeast]

Firstly, I'm sure you know the 12.872 results are correcting a reporting error and aren't yesterday. They go back in sonme cases to early September - and I know that doesn't change your calculation.

On the admissions, September is the start of the seasonal growth in respiratory conditions which usually peaks out in December.
It can be around 1,000 hospital admissions a day.
September 2015 saw 21,000 admissions for respiratory conditions.
What we are seeing isn't alarming in terms of numbers. BUt then you stick on the "with Covid" tag.

Yeah but a dead patient will have to had tested positive for covid to be counted as dying from it. So using your example, a chap goes to hospital and has pneumonia but not covid. He dies and cause of death is pneumonia. Not covid

You’re arguing against such a mute point anyway. The whole of the world recognises how deadly covid can be but, you, you’re not so sure....

[Mossdog]

Yeah but a dead patient will have to had tested positive for covid to be counted as dying from it. So using your example, a chap goes to hospital and has pneumonia but not covid. He dies and cause of death is pneumonia. Not covid

You’re arguing against such a mute point anyway. The whole of the world recognises how deadly covid can be but, you, you’re not so sure....

To be fair there are many who support WP's view - so it's not to be so readily discounted. Personally, I just follow the rules and I don't have a strong view either way. What does make me stop and think is whether we are getting this all out of proportion given some other facts banded about - e.g "5 people die every hour in the UK from sepsis" https://sepsistrust.org/about/about-sepsis/ Apparently, sepsis kills 52,000 people a year in the UK (that’s 142 a day - every day) - it certainly helps with perspective. And " One in five deaths around the world is caused by sepsis, also known as blood poisoning, shows the most comprehensive analysis of the condition." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51138859

[Witton Park]

Yeah but a dead patient will have to had tested positive for covid to be counted as dying from it. So using your example, a chap goes to hospital and has pneumonia but not covid. He dies and cause of death is pneumonia. Not covid

You’re arguing against such a mute point anyway. The whole of the world recognises how deadly covid can be but, you, you’re not so sure....

a chap goes to hospital with pneumonia and tests positive for Covid, he dies, and cause of death is.....

[Fellbeast]

I agree with the perspective point. My dad actually died from sepsis and my mum from heart disease. Cancer is a biggee too and they all knock spots off of covid. But covid is on top of those and not necessarily instead of. And, like the health system doing it’s best to stop people dying from sepsis etc, I t’s also doing its best to stop people dying from covid. Remember potentially a vaccine (or several vaccines) are likely in the next 3 to 6 months and, if successful, how terrible will we as a country look if we plough on from this point laxadasically and see a whopping amount of extra deaths whilst other countries take care and don’t?