Corona Virus: How Are We Doing?

[classic33]

Put that in context though; what have the total UK infections been so far? I mean the real, actual numbers, not the official ones which are massively under-reported because the majority of people with the virus will not have had a test.
Even if the real vs official infection rate was only a modest 4:1 over the course of the whole outbreak, then that would make 16 million actual cases. The stuff that gets reported on via government stats and in the media is only the tip of the iceberg, and will mainly be the worse cases involving severe infections. 60,000 cases with lingering after-effects is a substantial number if an accurate estimate, but it may only represent one in every 250 infections.

And yet you maintain that people like myself, with underlying health conditions, shouldn't be allowed out. Just so "your sort" who are healthy and with no chance of catching it can get on with your lives of "economic activity".

What about people like myself, don't we count?

 

[IaninSheffield]

Put that in context though; what have the total UK infections been so far? I mean the real, actual numbers, not the official ones which are massively under-reported because the majority of people with the virus will not have had a test.
Even if the real vs official infection rate was only a modest 4:1 over the course of the whole outbreak, then that would make 16 million actual cases. The stuff that gets reported on via government stats and in the media is only the tip of the iceberg, and will mainly be the worse cases involving severe infections. 60,000 cases with lingering after-effects is a substantial number if an accurate estimate, but it may only represent one in every 250 infections.

Does this tally with the ONS data which, as a random testing protocol, should provide a more accurate picture, shouldn't it?

 

[Ajax Bay]

over the course of the whole outbreak, then that would make 16 million actual cases. The stuff that gets reported on via government stats and in the media is only the tip of the iceberg, and will mainly be the worse cases involving severe infections. 60,000 cases is a substantial number if an accurate estimate, but it may only represent one in every 250 infections.

Skippy - let me comment on two points: numbers of people in UK that have or have been infected with C19 (graph below from ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey (pilot) data), and your 60k cases with lingering after-effects means 'one in every 250 infections'.
Infections

The blue lines show intervention change (lockdown on 23 Mar; relaxation on 11 May) and red line shows data cut date (07 Feb). The black line is the P value and the light blue shading shows the 95% credible interval.
https://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/nowcasting-and-forecasting-12th-february-2021/
If even a portion of the younger people infected in the last few months retain sufficent anti-bodies, that will bring forward the date when herd immunity starts kicking in (hopefully).
60,000 cases is still 60,000 cases across the 'long COVID' spectrum on top of all 'normal' morbidity which will therefore generate additional therapeutic demand. Whether it will be useful to differentiate between 'everything else' and long-COVID is not clear. Since this is 'new' research may help but not sure the cause of a morbidity should be a factor in treatment resource priorities.

 

[All uphill]

Put that in context though; what have the total UK infections been so far? I mean the real, actual numbers, not the official ones which are massively under-reported because the majority of people with the virus will not have had a test.
Even if the real vs official infection rate was only a modest 4:1 over the course of the whole outbreak, then that would make 16 million actual cases. The stuff that gets reported on via government stats and in the media is only the tip of the iceberg, and will mainly be the worse cases involving severe infections. 60,000 cases with lingering after-effects is a substantial number if an accurate estimate, but it may only represent one in every 250 infections.

It's only 60,000 people

Put that in context though; what have the total UK infections been so far? I mean the real, actual numbers, not the official ones which are massively under-reported because the majority of people with the virus will not have had a test.
Even if the real vs official infection rate was only a modest 4:1 over the course of the whole outbreak, then that would make 16 million actual cases. The stuff that gets reported on via government stats and in the media is only the tip of the iceberg, and will mainly be the worse cases involving severe infections. 60,000 cases with lingering after-effects is a substantial number if an accurate estimate, but it may only represent one in every 250 infections.

Not worth bothering about then.

I'll tell my son.

 

[fossyant]

60,000 - it's a hell of a lot of folk incapacitated that were otherwise fit. Of course CV is nothing to worry about.

Oh and don't mention the other 100k deaths - 100k too many.

The sooner we accept vaccinations, the sooner lockdown ends and the relief on mental health issues can start. Managers at my workplace are getting increasingly concerned for staff wellbeing, but there is bugger all anyone can do about it.

 

[fossyant]

And yet you maintain that people like myself, with underlying health conditions, shouldn't be allowed out. Just so "your sort" who are healthy and with no chance of catching it can get on with your lives of "economic activity".

What about people like myself, don't we count?

I'm one of the 'your sorts' but I'm sticking to the rules and getting the vaccine as soon as possible. Why, far too many people are getting very ill, get long term health issues, or even dead. I may have had the virus in December 19, don't know. I only go out for food, or to ride my bike, or a short walk with MrsF - all local, no driving for a 'walk'. Not seen any friends (other than cycling mates occasionally) for over a year.

Not bothered about catching it myself, but I want to protect anyone who has health conditions. Quite a few relatives are in the 'at risk' category - I'd rather not see my relatives in bits because say, my 60 y/o BIL has died from it, or my niece (BIL's daughter), who has bad asthma is dead.

Too many selfish people about TBH. It's the fit and healthy that will continue spreading the disease.

 

[classic33]

I'm one of the 'your sorts' but I'm sticking to the rules and getting the vaccine as soon as possible. Why, far too many people are getting very ill, get long term health issues, or even dead. I may have had the virus in December 19, don't know. I only go out for food, or to ride my bike, or a short walk with MrsF - all local, no driving for a 'walk'. Not seen any friends (other than cycling mates occasionally) for over a year.

Not bothered about catching it myself, but I want to protect anyone who has health conditions. Quite a few relatives are in the 'at risk' category - I'd rather not see my relatives in bits because say, my 60 y/o BIL has died from it, or my niece (BIL's daughter), who has bad asthma is dead.

Too many selfish people about TBH. It's the fit and healthy that will continue spreading the disease.

That means you're not one of "your sort" though. As your concern is for others more than your own "economic activity"*.


*Down the pub.

 

[fossyant]

That means you're not one of "your sort" though. As your concern is for others more than your own "economic activity"*.


*Down the pub.

I know but I'm in the same 'sort of' category as some, and I recon quite a bit younger !

* Down the Pub - oh how I wish.

 

[Andy in Germany]

And yet you maintain that people like myself, with underlying health conditions, shouldn't be allowed out. Just so "your sort" who are healthy and with no chance of catching it can get on with your lives of "economic activity".

What about people like myself, don't we count?

People with certain health conditions should have their freedom curtailed so "healthy people" aren't held back...

I seem to remember a similar idea gained popularity here a few decades ago: it ended badly.

 

[Andy in Germany]

the sooner lockdown ends and the relief on mental health issues can start.

Yeah, that. I fully understand and support lockdowns and other measures, but I'm beginning to wonder how much long term psychological trouble we will have to deal with.

 

[classic33]

Yeah, that. I fully understand and support lockdowns and other measures, but I'm beginning to wonder how much long term psychological trouble we're causing ourselves.

I think we'll see more problems with the type of person that likes to be seen and heard, than those who are happy in their own company. In some ways the latter have already adjusted to the situation.

The belief that in order to get on in life, you must be seen and heard, above everyone else, is in for a shakeup.

 

[fossyant]

I think we'll see more problems with the type of person that likes to be seen and heard, than those who are happy in their own company. In some ways the latter have already adjusted to the situation.

The belief that in order to get on in life, you must be seen and heard, above everyone else, is in for a shakeup.

True. Very true.

 

[fossyant]

MrsF's friend texted in a panic yesterday - her teen daughter has tested positive. Further update, she's tested positive too - worried sick ! Hopefully she'll be OK. Teen daughter works in a nursery, but is still going out visiting friends and her boyfriend. So there are a load of folk who will now have to isolate.

 

[winjim]

MrsF's friend texted in a panic yesterday - her teen daughter has tested positive. Further update, she's tested positive too - worried sick ! Hopefully she'll be OK. Teen daughter works in a nursery, but is still going out visiting friends and her boyfriend. So there are a load of folk who will now have to isolate.

SMH

 

[marinyork]

Yeah, that. I fully understand and support lockdowns and other measures, but I'm beginning to wonder how much long term psychological trouble we will have to deal with.

It's going to be a very difficult time for some considerable time.

The mental health side that might get a very slight easing of the pressure is care home visits will return (with I'm sure sadly a million and one different policies by care homes) and group 6 will mean that some with severe psychological conditions will get vaccinated meaning aspects of services become a bit easier to run. That doesn't do anything at all for many others where there situations causing a decline may not change for another 3-4 months.

The UK media are a bit funny on this, a recent academic study said depression and anxiety had trebled in the first 'lockdown' and another study saying a very large minority of the population weren't doing well and this was presented as good news, that we'd have expected it to be higher etc!

My favourite tv show in the UK this morning was still stumbling to get around the very basic nuances of swimming vs pubs and socialising and other things that are good for mental health, despite it being in a ring in show and having talked to real people for nearly a year about it! So I don't hold out much hope. Don't really hold out much hope for wider society especially as backbench MPs just go on about pubs constantly.