253 people under the age of 60 with no other underlying health issues had died from Covid-19 in the UK

[whenthejoyreturns]

I'm in no way trying to minimise these deaths at all but I wondered if people were aware of this number. Every day we hear the number of deaths, but this is never broken down into categories that we can relate to ourselves.
30 people under the age of 45 with no other underlying health issues had died from Covid-19 in the UK.
AIBU to want people to know this because I don't think enough people realise.

How many people on here have IBS? To most of the many (mainly women) who have this condition it is not a major factor in the scheme of things. However this is an underlying health condition. Post mortems have shown that inflammation caused by IBS can lead of micro blood clots and necrosis etc and death. THe virus causes internal organs to breakdown and it is thought that relatively minor conditions can be a catalyst. These fatalities were patients who appeared to have a relatively minor form of the disease who after appearing to recover have a relapse. A similar scenario is probably responsible for the young children who have developed an inflammatory disease.
So those of you feeling impregnable re dying from covid19 have another thought. Would you rather be safe than sorry?

@Cindie943811A I haven’t seen a link from IBS as a risk factor? 70% of patience in ICU are men.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/coronavirus-uk-over-70-of-critical-care-patients-are-men

This figure is pretty constant - if it’s changing at all it’s going up - and yet mental health services have their funding cut again and again.
There’s no logic to it.

It seems less logical to assume that mental health spending will reduce suicide rates proportionately.

It's not like, say, a vaccination (covid-19, say), where there's a clear outcome.

There's evidence that it doesn't help.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0020764009342384?journalCode=ispa

Also in general increased NHS spending has been very inefficient. Labour pissed untold billions up the wall on PFI contracts, then lots more on pay for doctors, which is nice for the recipients, but doesn't improve patient outcomes - you could pay all staff a million pounds a year , give foreign workers free visas, etc., but there's no logical reason to do so.

The inflammatory disease for children is so rare as well.

I think those at risk should stay protected and everyone else try and get things moving again. I fear the collateral damage will be worse than the virus with job loses biggest recession ever seen and other areas of the NHS being closed. My blood donation appointment was cancelled because of Covid19....surely people still need blood!! If we had a daily death toll in our normal lives and what from I don’t think we would leave our houses ever!

Haven't rtft.
Do you want under 45s go come out of lockdown first?
It's certainly one potential option. Is it a popular one?

If we had a daily death toll in our normal lives and what from I don’t think we would leave our houses ever!

Well it would certainly be instructional at this point to add deaths from other causes into the daily Death TV show.

Yes I would happy to come out of lockdown, looking at the risk factor and my daughter back to school, 4 under 20’s females dying from Covid and most of those had serious health issues, those odds sound pretty good to me.

Just one anecdote, but I know a family where the husband and wife were about to separate due to her alcoholism amongst other things; the kids are teenagers, and one had come home from university and is trying to get their exams done in the most toxic of environments, the 16 year old has had their GCSEs cancelled and spends all day in his room on his computer and is getting paler and more bad tempered by the day, and the mum just spends her whole time drinking in her room. She has been made redundant because of lockdown. The dad is in despair.

I don't know what the answer is, but it's terrible and my heart is breaking for them.

Are you telling me I’m expendable because I have a pre-existing health condition?

Someone spectacularly missed the OP’s point here

I don’t think YABU OP. I saw similar stats the other day and was surprised the numbers were that low.

If it's the majority view amongst under 45s I think the government needs to seriously consider taking that approach. But ensure that those under 45 with high risks (diabetes, hypertension, cardiac or kidney issues, lung conditions, etc) are allowed to continue self isolating if they prefer.

When lockdown first started, we didn't know what the risk factors were. Now we do and those with no risk factors need to get back to normal.
We still don’t know what the risk factors are. We are guessing at it. We don’t understand why the virus attacks some people’s lungs, others’ hearts, kidneys, why the inflammatory condition is happening in children etc.
And with the risk factors we think we know, are we going to keep everyone who’s overweight, male or BAME at home?

Could you let us know where you got those numbers from thanks?

@ToffeeYoghurt I think once furlough changes in August a lot of people won’t have a choice but to return to normal. Looking at the risk factor for my age, gender and pretty healthy I’m willing to take the risk.

Hester People have always been allowed to move home. Particularly if they're leaving difficult or abusive situations. If the issue is housing affordability that's something that's been a problem for some time pre pandemic. Longer-term we need more council housing.
Would the wife in the case you know be able to use her redundancy pay to rent somewhere?

@EarlGreywithLemon surely everyone should be able to make their own choice on what the risk is to them? What about loosing their homes if they don’t go back to work but their risk to coronvirus is low, should they have to stay at home?

Toffee ah it's way more complicated than that I'm afraid. Lots of messy horrible details.

They're stuck in the house together and it's awful

And if you really want to talk numbers OP: the estimate is that max. 5% of the population have had it so far in the UK. Without lockdown, the number that was bandied about by the government was that 80% of the population would catch it. So that would be 16 times more, or at least 4,000 “healthy people” dead. I say at least because with the health system overwhelmed a higher proportion would die than have so far. Is that an acceptable number to you ???

I'm under 60 and generally healthy but do have slight asthma.

If I dropped dead from Covid I wouldn't be included on those statistics. A lot of people will have some health condition.

There are simplistically 2 options

The first is to let the less vulnerable quickly out of lockdown. The virus will run rampant through this community with little negative effect, but until it has burnt through the vulnerable will be extremely vulnerable and will have to spend a significant amount of additional time in isolation

Or we wait a little longer and then we should be able, through test trace and isolate, to keep the risk low so that all people have the same freedoms

The first approach will not necessarily help the economy any more than the second because the economy will be running up at half speed whilst the virus runs through society and the Middle Aged ( at a guess all people over 45 if you want the NHS to cope with the very poorly but not dead people ) and vulnerable make up a large part of the population , and the first approach takes a quite a while

@Alex50, but they’re not just making their own choice. Every single person who is infected and ends up in hospital is putting doctors and nurses at risk.
Even if you don’t end up in hospital, you are contagious before symptoms start to show. So if you’re out and about you are exposing supermarket workers, bus drivers, and anyone else you come into contact with - friends, family, colleagues, etc. They in turn are putting others at risk. It’s exponential.

If I have high blood pressure (only just come down on my last check) and we know there's something wrong with my kidneys but don't know what cos of covid (appointment cancelled that would probably have given us more info) possibly something wrong with my heart but it might be just my kidneys. I'm not on the list that the government put out so I haven't really been seeing myself as vulnerable or anything
But there are comments on here that imply I might be vulnerable? I'm just a bit confused.
Especially when my little girl might go back to school in June

Austerity killed thousands:

bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/11/e017722.full

But no one cared because they were poor people.

The depression (and it will be a depression, not a recession) will thousands more. But again, they will mostly be poor people so no one cares.

Historians will look back on this period of history as the time we allowed mass hysteria to cause mass devastation.

I'm quite healthy on the outside and feel fine

When people say healthy people could come out of lockdown first. Do you mean go back to all work settings, to the cinema, bars, gyms, hairdressers, eachother’s houses, university lectures etc. Now?

But ensure that those under 45 with high risks (diabetes, hypertension, cardiac or kidney issues, lung conditions, etc) are allowed to continue self isolating

Those with Diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, obesity, moderate to severe asthma, (and the rest of the clinically vulnerable) and people of BAME backgrounds ...and their families????

Not working, not going to the supermarkets, no access to health and social care (as those health and social care workers are healthy people who have been mixing widely)???