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.

This does not make me feel any better at all OP, on a personal level (although I can see your point, kind of, if you personally fall into that 'healthy, younger' bracket 🤷‍♀️). As a 56 year old Year 1 teacher about to be forced back into what feels, to me, to be a pretty much untested and 'no guarantee' place of work, I'm feeling quite anxious right now 🤷‍♀️😢 Of course I'll do it, with a huge smile for my wonderful children, who I care very deeply for...and they will never know how I'm feeling inside (I can at least guarantee that!) But it is a worry...so no, your statistics do not make me feel better, sorry!

Let's make sure there as a many poor people as possible that will help save lives and is very caring.

I think as soon as we saw what was happening in Italy we should have had the lockdown, airports shut before that. Then the test, track and trace put in place ASAP. Half of hospitals should have become corona-only and half stayed the same doing the routine care.

Absolutely shield the vulnerable especially those in care house but the rest of us could be out of lockdown by now and the economy up and running

While I understand that the impact of the Lockdown has been terrible, can you imagine what the figures would be like if we hadn't locked down? Do you really think it is ok to condemn a large percentage of the over 60s to a grim death?

Society makes me sick. Traffic is more of a threat to children than covid...yet look at people's reactions to speed cameras or any kind of traffic calming measures. Ironically now children are expected to sacrifice everything for people who couldn't care less about them or their safety.

It's grotesque

It's funny, no one appears to have given a flying fuck about the disabled and sick the past 10 years the Tories have used ideology driving 'austerity' to openly persecute them, but now all of the sudden it's a condition that might effect you it's 'OMG! Lock us down forever! It's not safe! You don't care about me! My life is just as important.

Hyperbole much?

Even now, those disabled by mental health conditions descending into acute illness or even suicide due to this, fuck 'em, it's not Covid-19 so they don't count.

What people who say this mean is " I don't have underlying conditions and I am the most important and everyone else is expendable so that I can do what I want because there isn't a very big risk to ME"

Quite. So much for a caring society.

Yanbu at all.
As a society, with improvements in health care and longer life expectancy, we seem to have lost track of the fact that death comes to us all, and generally - as with Covid - it comes to us in old age.
And continuing lockdown will cause a health and early death 'pandemic' for years to come. Already, it is thought to be 2/3 of people who have put on weight during lockdown, in a nation where over 60% are overweight or obese and where obesity is a Co morbidity for Covid.
'Every death matters' is repeated whenever facts and figures about Covid are discussed, but from the lack of care being shown for other deaths (and indeed lives) that appears not to be true. From cancer to dementia to mental health, to children's health and wellbeing, to preventative medicine, everything is being sacrificed for one particular illness.
To be positive, though that is very hard, we could use this time for good in a way: perhaps if the media set out the numbers of deaths from other causes every day, we could, as a society, start discussing what we need to do to improve health generally.
The quality life expectancy figures are a real eye opener - as a nation we have high life expectancy yet in the most deprived areas, life in good health ends by 50.
However, the media don't list every day the people dying 'young' due to the effects of deprivation.

I'd much rather be unemployed and poor than mourn my parents who have underlying conditions in their early 60s or my friend's 7yo with asthma. You can financially rebuild, but you can't bring people back once they're gone. But then, I survived a war in the country I came from so I really don't give a f*ck if I (or someone else) can't afford more than bare survival if the trade off is a life lost, that could have been saved.

But if we're speaking brutal realism - it would be interesting to compare percentages of people who would be severely financially struggling (as in bankrupt/homeless) if lockdown continued vs. percentage of those with underlying conditions whose lives would be jeopardized if it was lifted. Is it really more people who wouldn't be able to afford food than those who may die? Or is it that people are not willing to take ANY financial hit (loss of savings/travel etc.) to save lives of their less fortunate (health-wise) neighbours?

Also, I'd like to see the stats on people left with new conditions (lung/heart damage) after Covid infection, who have previously been healthy. That may change the narrative here.

A high proportion of people under 45 DO have underlying conditions such as obesity, diabetes, Asthma, etc. A lot of the photos of victims clearly show they were obese. Trouble is a lot of people are in denial that they are obese. There was a story on our regional TV about a "fit and healthy" 29 year old bloke who died of Covid - they showed a picture of him and he was clearly obese, not "fit and healthy"!

I don’t understand why threads keep saying it would be fine if we end lockdown and shield the vulnerable.

We are still in lockdown and many vulnerable people are at work. There’s no outrage about this. The public is fine with it.

What posters actually mean is end lockdown and keep the vulnerable at work even though many of them will die.

Indeed:

"Lindy2 Sat 23-May-20 14:58:30
Out of a population of around 66 million that's 0.00035606%. All deaths from this virus are tragic because it should never have happened but it does put the actual risk of dying into a bit more perspective."

So perhaps that is why people go to the beach and are attempting to get back to normal... they have put the risk into perspective?

I thought the number was lower but knew it was in this corridor.

I think people are deliberately trying to misinterpret you op, this comment “It is not ok to justify my death because I had underlying health conditions as if it doesn’t matter” is a prime example.

What you’re saying and others is that the risk to healthy people under 65 is so incredibly low. The whole “you didn’t know you had an underlying health condition” is a bit reaching, because to be completely without symptoms of any health conditions and for doctors not to be able to tell you have them it’s unlikely you’ve got something that will help kill you. Possible, sure, but such a very very low probability.

No one is trying to say any deaths don’t matter and it’s appalling to suggest otherwise, what people are saying is healthy people below sixty five have a infinitesimally small chance of Covid being fatal to them. As such they don’t need to take the same personal precautions as those at a higher risk, who should be studiously self distancing and have protection if required to isolate. (Ie job or financial).

The whole population should not be locked down for something that poses them little to no risk, when the majority of them can go about their business relatively risk free.

21% of adults between 25 and 34 in the U.K. population have asthma

13% of under 45s are obese in the UK

These are underlying conditions, to name just two.

I think the proportion of people with “underlying conditions “ is probably surprisingly high.

It would be useful if the OP could link her source so we could see the risk to under 45s WITH underlying conditions.

healthsurvey.hscic.gov.uk/media/81643/HSE18-Asthma-rep.pdf

commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn03336/

Number one, as many posts said already, not sure if that number is accurate and number two you or your perfectly healthy family could be the one in that small number. Plus, unlike other casualties, you or your family might have spread it to other people who in turn do the same without lockdown.
Yes, I agree with OP that our economy is greatly suffering but what should be the focus here is how badly this government has responded to it. South Korea hasn't completely done lockdown even though they had large number of confirmed cases because they have been able to manage it and keep the death toll to low.

I'm curious as to whether people with auto- immune conditions are more at risk. Doesn't seem to have been mentioned as a risk factor but cytokine storm is a deadly problem with COVID. Looks like immuno- suppressants are sometimes given for cytokine storm plus RA where a suppressed overactive immune system is either less dangerous / greatly improves quality of life.
You wouldn't want to suppress the immune system without a very good reason. But eg psoriasis and Hashmitos are both auto immune- wondering if these conditions pre dispose some people to cytokine storm.

can you imagine what the figures would be like if we hadn't locked down?

Possibly not a lot different. As we find out more about the disease, the benefits of locking down seem less clear.

However, we did lock down, the NHS was not overwhelmed (which was the goal), we are well past the peak of deaths, excess deaths are no above average, most transmission is in hospitals and care homes rather than the community.

So why is our society still shut down?

Everything of value that we have created together over generations has been suspended and we are living tiny Thatcherite lives of just being individual men and women and our families.

It's time for our society to resume beyond a weekly performed clap.

I should add that’s 26% of 25-44 year olds who are obese

‘ As such they don’t need to take the same personal precautions as those at a higher risk, who should be studiously self distancing and have protection if required to isolate. (Ie job or financial).’

How are people supposed to self distance properly when they have been told they must return to work and they must use public transport if there isn’t an alternative?

Do you know what really depresses me? It's that we seem to have split into 2 groups:

Those don't give a shit about anyone else, so long as they can go where they want, when they want and how they want. They aren't personally going to catch the bug or suffer through lockdown, so up-yours to everyone else. They'll find ANY excuse to ignore the rules.

And the rest of us, who understand what the lockdown is for and are doing our best to get through it without putting others at risk.

I'd much rather be unemployed and poor than mourn my parents who have underlying conditions in their early 60s or my friend's 7yo with asthma

Well we all think that about those close to us.

I'd sacrifice the entire world to save my own DC's life.

But objectively, we don't preserve life over everything else. If we did, we'd ban cars, alcohol, extreme sports.

There's a balance. Would you see the collapse of the entire world's economy to save one single life? Well if that one life was your child's, you would...but objectively no you wouldn't sacrifice the world's economy to save one person.

Also agree with @sandysmam
I dont have any known conditions myself but fed up of the I'm alright Jack mentality. We are easing out of lockdown so hopefully things will slowly improve.
Such a shame (massive understatement) we didnt lockdown a week or two earlier then we could have avoided countless deaths and probably had a shorter, less impacting lockdown.

Ironically now children are expected to sacrifice everything for people who couldn't care less about them or their safety.

And then be expected to pick up the tab for all this through their taxes for the rest of their lives, with their earning potential compromised by their education being allowed to go to shit (and so many on here are so focused on young children, hello, plenty of us have teens and young adults, they're being utterly SHAFTED by this!).

I’m getting really tired of these threads where people quote numbers with no source.

OP, you have different figures in the title and in the post, and you haven’t said over what timeframe this is. It makes the post effectively meaningless.

The OP has probably been on the website of the ONS (Office National Statistics) which breaks the figures down by age and it does highlight that the chances increase greatly with age and massively with an underlying condition, as well as the number of deaths being higher in more deprived areas.

Pointing out a statistic is not making the elderly or people with an underlying condition a sacrifice or collateral damage. No-one is lacking compassion. Put down the pitchforks.