1325 new virus deaths, how did this happen?

[the_atomic_fart]

It happened beacuse accordong to PHE, no one died of any other cause in the last few days......

Seriously?

 

[Enoch]

The one thing I will always say.

We know what age groups are affected by this to even greater extent than any other criteria to the tune of thousands every week.

We know what age groups are being admitted to hospital , again even greater than most other criteria / age groups combined.

So sitting here in our third lockdown , with the same age groups filling the hospital's and same age groups making up a significant amount of the deaths.

Why wasn't this ever focused on?

You can play the wear a mask to save others bullshit line over and over but the numbers don't lie. So how on earth are those numbers still high , how on earth are these age groups still being significantly affected.

And most importantly.

How does a national lockdown help things when the point of the lockdown doesn't affect the significant number of people lying in hospital or dying?

Perhaps shutting the country down over and over after 10 months is a waste of time when all of this could have been focused on cutting virus access to those who we KNOW at this point.

 

[Enoch]

It happened beacuse accordong to PHE, no one died of any other cause in the last few days......

Seriously?


View attachment 236449

That's the issue here.

Calling it for what it is, anyone 80 and over make up the significant amount of covid deaths and hospital cases. So when they roll out 70k have died from covid taking into account the age groups in there, you are essentially removing all other causes why someone 80 plus has died.

To put It into perspective, one of the listed reasons for Sean Connery dying was old age. Yet given thousands of people have died 85 plus due to covid, it would suggest age has stopped playing a factor into deaths at that age group. Hell I have seen so many people explain all of this away, why numbers of other deaths have dropped by hundreds a week and how covid causes everything .

What we do know is thousands have died BECAUSE of covid also. So we need to socially distance , wear masks , have restrictions in place and all the rest of it to protect people who wouldn't die otherwise. All of that sits fine with me, more than happy to restrict my own life to help someone else. I even found out recently a young lad I work with gas on the priority list for a vaccine , making me wearing a mask every day in work justified.

However I just don't agree with how wanting to discuss the subject is dismissed out of hand these days. 12 months time you will see all this in the data.

 

[OzoreXS]

- Xmas shopping (and shopping in general)
- Acting like theres no pandemic out there
- Feeling 100% secure just by wearing a mask
- Public transport
- etc

Its very sad.

 

[Mitz]

"In the last few weeks, for example, adults aged 18-64 have accounted for 40% of daily Covid admissions to hospitals, data from Public Health England shows. This compares to 40% for 65-84 year olds and 20% for the over-85s."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994

 

[Enoch]

"In the last few weeks, for example, adults aged 18-64 have accounted for 40% of daily Covid admissions to hospitals, data from Public Health England shows. This compares to 40% for 65-84 year olds and 20% for the over-85s."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994

But the overall pattern of those at risk of becoming seriously ill or dying has not changed significantly.

The older someone is, the greater their risk from Covid-19 - particularly over the age of 65.

For people under 40 who are infected, their risk of death is 0.1%. This rises to more than 5% for people over 80, according to Imperial College London research on the first wave.

Part of the problem with covid discussion is lack of context to anything being said. So easy to throw figures around or make sweeping statements without providing the context of such.

This information contradicts the rate in which people per age group are going into hospital by quite some margin.

So perhaps the information is conflicting with each other depending on what you are looking for. Perhaps solely posting information is just as misleading as making stuff up.

This isn't aimed at you, more of a thinking out loud moment again.

 

[oldhippydude]

"In the last few weeks, for example, adults aged 18-64 have accounted for 40% of daily Covid admissions to hospitals, data from Public Health England shows. This compares to 40% for 65-84 year olds and 20% for the over-85s."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55586994

I find the next paragraph better captures the general tone of the whole article

"The ages of people who have died with Covid-19 since June show the huge impact on older age groups and the rarity of a Covid death in the under-30s.

But there have been some during the pandemic. Twenty-seven deaths have occurred among under-19s who tested positive for Covid-19, according to NHS England, and 317 among 20 to 39-year-olds.

More than 80% had an underlying health condition, such as heart disease or type 2 diabetes, which may have increased their risk.

Dr Nick Scriven, a former president of the Society for Acute Medicine, says he has seen a patient in their 20s requiring oxygen treatment but most were in their mid-40s, 50s and above - and the most seriously ill were over 50.

"They are not very different ages to the first wave," he says, although people are surviving for longer and fewer are being put on ventilators."

 

[Mitz]

I find the next paragraph better captures the general tone of the whole article

"The ages of people who have died with Covid-19 since June show the huge impact on older age groups and the rarity of a Covid death in the under-30s.

But there have been some during the pandemic. Twenty-seven deaths have occurred among under-19s who tested positive for Covid-19, according to NHS England, and 317 among 20 to 39-year-olds.

More than 80% had an underlying health condition, such as heart disease or type 2 diabetes, which may have increased their risk.

Dr Nick Scriven, a former president of the Society for Acute Medicine, says he has seen a patient in their 20s requiring oxygen treatment but most were in their mid-40s, 50s and above - and the most seriously ill were over 50.

"They are not very different ages to the first wave," he says, although people are surviving for longer and fewer are being put on ventilators."

That's why I linked the article I quoted. The quote was in response to earlier comments that have been repeated in other threads that this is only a problem of the old and sick. You don't have to be old, sick or dying to fill a hospital bed as the figures I quoted show along with the hospitals full, or nearly full, to capacity....and still filling.

Maybe I should have been specific and quoted the comments I was addressing with my post.

 

[oldhippydude]

That's why I linked the article I quoted. The quote was in response to earlier comments that have been repeated in other threads that this is only a problem of the old and sick. You don't have to be old, sick or dying to fill a hospital bed as the figures I quoted show along with the hospitals full, or nearly full, to capacity.

I replied because I had already read the BBC article and thought that your chosen quote was misleading with regards to the overall tone of the whole thing.

Your chosen quote is not very informative. Lumping 18-64 year olds together is imo a rather misleading way to give the information, especially out of context of the rest of the article. You can be sure that the 40% of hospitalised in that age group were so heavily skewed towards the older end of the spectrum that it does not really tell us anything useful about the risk individuals of different ages face.

My chosen quote may not ilustrate the point you want but is less misleading.

 

[Mitz]

I replied because I had already read the BBC article and thought that your chosen quote was misleading with regards to the overall tone of the whole thing.

Your chosen quote is not very informative. Lumping 18-64 year olds together is imo a rather misleading way to give the information, especially out of context of the rest of the article. You can be sure that the 40% of hospitalised in that age group were so heavily skewed towards the older end of the spectrum that it does not really tell us anything useful about the risk individuals of different ages face.

My chosen quote may not ilustrate the point you want but is less misleading.

It's not misleading at all to illustrate that this isn't only a problem for the old and sick. Maybe someone should tell that to the NHS staff dealing with it or all non-covid patients unable to get their scheduled treatments. Whether they're 18 or 64 is wholly irrelevant to the point I was making. So your point is irrelevant to mine which is accurately laid bare in the quote I posted with accompanying article link.