Uk coronavirus deaths predicted to be 66,000 the worst in Europe, 2nd worse in world.

[HerstoryInTheMaking]

Why does this not surprise me. We were appalling slow to allow lockdown. Govt u-turn on herd immunity. Allowing Cheltenham and other events to go ahead. Those in charge need to be held accountable when this is over.

metro.co.uk/2020/04/07/uk-set-66000-coronavirus-deaths-becoming-worst-hit-europe-12521377/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Also, overall death rate would be expected to be closer to 1% than .1%.

1% of 68 million people is 680,000.

If only 66,000 die in the UK, we'll have done bloody fantastic.

Your right, India have approached this much like other European countries by imposing an early lockdown.

This is not true, they had people (Muslim proselytisers) from other countries with no control over covid-19 arriving in thousands and spreading disease.

There was an event on 13-15 March attended by thousands of foreign Muslims, which is the biggest virus vector in India.

www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/tablighi-jamaat-event-india-worst-coronavirus-vector-200407052957511.html

This followed a similar event in Malaysia at the end of February which caused thousands of infections, as was first known by 7th March and widely reported in international media by 11th March

www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2020/03/11/health-ministry-tracking-5000-missionaries-for-covid-19-tests/

Not trying to be goady. Every death is awful, but didn't 100,000 die of swine flu?

Agreed we need to wait and see how many extra deaths over the norm, if any, that will be.

Also, how many of those will be due to lack of resources/overloading the NHS - and therefore preventable by social distancing - and how many will be, unfortunately, people who would always have died from this? The lockdown won’t eradicate the virus, people will keep catching it as long as we don’t have a vaccine, so social distancing really is only going to slow the spread in many cases and not actually save lives.

Why are people only talking about (on this thread) waiting for a vaccine!? We're not just waiting on a vaccine, how about better treatment & flattening the curve.

These predictions are based on the UK having 799 ICU beds. This report says we have 5900 - before the addition of the new Nightingale hospitals.
www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/nhs-hospital-bed-numbers.

@MissDollyMix in the UK, 392 people died from swine flu. 18,000 ish worldwide.

@MissDollyMix flattening the curve is unlikely to stop people getting it, it’s to slow the rate at which they get it. Many people will die from this regardless of what anyone does.

Oh yeah? It's an American study so it's a load of propagandist bollocks I'd take it with a massive pinch of salt.

The clincher for me is the statement "It seems likely the number of deaths will exceed our projections for the United States".

But also the modelling itself... we already know that no 2 countries are measuring CV the same way, so ALL models offering a comparison are, of necessity, flawed.

Exactly. The only figure that matters is the deaths and even then it only matterw when we know those figures are being compiled and reported using exactly the same criteria. And they are not.

Missdollymix fewer than 400 people died in UK from swine flu

Italy has 16.5 k deaths already.

The reports suggest 20k I'm total.

It would be great if it's right but i can't see only another 3.5 k dying.

And that's not taking into account those who have not been recorded as CV death.

Totally predictable.
In spite of all those saying other countries are lying, they will have more dead later, etc. The truth is if other countries do have more dead later, so will we.

And yet 3 weeks after Cheltenham there is no spike or hot spot in deaths or cases in gloucestershire

People attend Cheltenham from all over the world, absolutely loads from
Ireland for example.

I personally know of at least eight people who are unwell with coronavirus after going to Cheltenham, one on a ventilator. One managed to spread it all round his office the following week, too.

I don't understand why our strategy is, "Let it spread at a rate the NHS can cope with". That would make sense if NHS treatment was enough to save everyone - but there are many people who'll die from this regardless of how good their medical care is. Those people are just sacrificial?

Norway claims to have already brought it under control by getting the re-infection rate down to 0.7, so that the spread is not self sustaining. Why isn't that our strategy?

Also, overall death rate would be expected to be closer to 1% than .1%.

1% of 68 million people is 680,000.

^If only 66,000 die in the UK, we'll have done bloody fantastic.
^
The usual annual death rate in the UK is around 1% of the population. It is the excess deaths over and above that 1% due to CV and the actions put in place to manage it, that are of interest.

The most significant rise in additional deaths in the last half-century was the flu season of 1989/90 which led to 26,000 excess deaths.

@ADreamOfGood Although everyone on social media seems to know someone who died of it.Mmm

Powerslidepanda

The duration and extent of lockdown required to extinguish the virus would cause mass starvation. Then it would immediately be reimported from abroad anyway.

Not everyone can survive this novel virus. That's the issue which needs to be managed out as best as is possible without there being even more deaths due to a lockdown.

"The cure was worse than the disease" is what we're trying to avoid.

Not forgetting that huge Stereophonics gig in Cardiff and the football matches in Wolverhampton and Liverpool.

Dr Harries saying it was fine for outdoor events.

Powerslide the reinfection rate in UK is believed to be under 1

So that has been strategy here.

But I think there is also a realisation that lockdown is only a short term fix.

Our strategy appears to be the same as most other countries now,

get infection rate under 1 and it has been reported that we have achieved that post lockdown

It takes many weeks for this to filter through into reductions in cases and deaths, we just have to hold our nerve.

It may take us longer than some countries as we let it get out of hand

But the success of Austria, progress in Germany, Spain and Italy show it will happen

The required strategy worldwide will vary according to the strength of the different economy's

And that will mean much stronger border controls for probably a couple of years

If we can get it under control within the uk and then don't import fresh cases there is no need at all for everyone to accept that they will catch this

I almost wonder if it was a deliberate thing to let big events go ahead.

They knew lockdown was coming. But the goal was to get as many people infected as possible before that.

So far the NHS still has capacity.

When we reach our peak we will have more % of the country infected than other countries.

We will also hopefully be in a better position than now re testing.

The duration and extent of lockdown required to extinguish the virus would cause mass starvation. Then it would immediately be reimported from abroad anyway.

But Norway claim to have already managed it - in a short space of time and without mass starvation. We're not talking about staying locked down until every case has either recovered or died - just until there are sufficiently few that it will fizzle out - as all previous epidemics have done. Newly imported cases can then be handled through quarantine, as China is doing.

But it is most likely that the percentage of the uk population infected is still in the single figure percentages, so irrelevant in terms of immunity and daily living