There's been around 40 deaths of under 45 year olds with no underlying health conditions.

[mywayhighway]

I'm always amazed how so many people on MN know someone (or often 2) under 45 who've died from Coronavirus with no underlying health conditions.

Am I unusual in that I have no direct knowledge of anyone, of any age, who has died of COVID 19. In fact I don’t personally know anyone who has had it though I have heard of a few.

A lot of people with chronic kidney disease may not even realise they have it in the early stages and is something else that may be picked up on when they are admitted for an unrelated reason.

OP I thought you were trying to ‘frighten’ people and suggest 40 people is a large number.

I realise I was wrong and you are pointing out that the numbers are so low you wonder how so many people ‘know someone’

I totally agree with you!

I don't think people mean to say that people over 65 or with underlying health conditions aren't important.
More that the risk to the rest of us is very low, so we should have restrictions lifted for those people to allow education to return to normal, reopening of shops and businesses etc.

Of course, that doesn't address issues of those who don't know they have an underlying health condition, what you do about go betweens like carers. And how many people would actually be in the 'healthy' group.

@AlecTrevelyan006

This is why schools should reopen in full straight away and the 2m rule should be relaxed to 1m.

We have destroyed the economy and ruined the education of millions of children because of a disease that mainly effects the over 60s. It is madness.

Absolutely 100% in agreement.

A young 59 ?

@Barbie222

I think the term "underlying health conditions" is a bit othering. Anyone use an inhaler? Over 28 BMI? Otherwise living your best life? The term is used as a way to minimise the data.

Completely agree.

It’s chilling, actually.

The risk to under 50s is replicated across the world. Italy has had even less deaths than us in this age range.

20% of people with Covid call caught it in hospital and 50% caught in a care home

Really? According to the statistics there are about 400k people in care homes in the UK.
There's about 300k people so far who have caught it.
So 150k people according to that caught Covid in a care home.

That is saying saying that over a third the people in care homes have had Covid? That's one in three residents.

We’re 59 is not young, it’s handy knowing the numbers to access your risk, i’ll post the link again in case anyone has missed it:

www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/06/COVID-19-total-announced-deaths-10-June-2020-weekly-tables.xlsx

48% of deaths are from care homes.

@witchend I think she meant 50% of the deaths were people who caught it in a care home, which is true.

I have moderate asthma, daily inhaler and tablet and am NOT considered to have an underlying health condition.

I'm one of those who knows a previously healthy under 25 yr old who lost their life to Covid. Large numbers of people here have caught it, and some have lost their lives to it. I'm at university so it's not particularly surprising to me that out of those in my circle affected, that one should be young. (We've had students, facilities staff, academics, and cleaners lose their lives to it, as well as friends outside of university.)
I know it isn't what the thread's implying but given how many MN'ers are either in education, have young adults in education, or work in education, it doesn't actually seem particularly surprising that the incidence of knowing younger victims may be higher.

I still don’t know anyone that’s even had it and I’m in the Northwest.

I do know of two teenagers over the years that dropped dead of a heart attack whilst playing sports. Young deaths do occur.

Funny that, people lying on the Internet. When they say ‘know’, I imagine they’ve read about it in the papers 🥴

Even if you get it when you are 80, there’s still more chance you’ll survive than die!

Of those under 45 - whatwere their health conditions?

Were they health conditions which would normally led to a premature death?
Or, like many of the 'greater risk' categories ones were -expel can generally expect to live until they are elderly?

Because the umbrella term 'health conditions' isn't very helpful for those people who live with underlining conditions.

I’m surprised that more people aren’t worried about the long-term symptoms. I believe I’m in the 20% who have lingering symptoms having been unwell for almost three months. I still have to have a break if I do anything strenuous (that’s washing up, pegging out washing or vacuuming). I’m only able to work about four hours a day. It’s pretty hard to function.

Oh, and I wasn’t bad enough to be hospitalised!

I'm always amazed how so many people on MN know someone (or often 2) under 45 who've died from Coronavirus with no underlying health conditions.

MN had visits from over 119 million unique users in 2018. It is largely, but not solely, a UK based site. There are 66 million people in the UK.

It doesn't surprise me at all . Probably every single one of those people who died had a casual aquaintance who posts on MN.

covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-long-term
There seems to be an implicit assumption in these threads discussing death rates that if you get Covid-19 but don't die then you are absolutely fine. That is very far from the truth, as this report from Zoe app people shows. A significant number of people suffer long-term problems from Covid-19, in some cases due to organ damage, and there is minimal support available to such people. To the best of my knowledge our government doesn't even compile statistics on numbers of people who recover from Covid-19 where "recovery" means being back to how you were pre-Covid rather than simply not being dead. I wonder whether the failure to compile recovery statistics is because that wouldn't suit the government's "Everyone back to work now" agenda.

The risk level of dying from covid is low for most people, that is true. The figures linked to were from the 28th of March to the 29th of May, so the peak weeks and also the main weeks of lockdown. So the deaths mentioned happened during lockdown.
What would be good to know is how much the period of lockdown reduced the risk, what would the risk have been to each age group if we hadn't locked down ? How is that risk level effected by coming out of lockdown ?

I wonder about pre-diabetes being under diagnosed. Is there not about a third of people with that? Also more common in certain ethnicities at younger ages.

Asthma is considered a very small risk with Covid now.

Only 5 children under 15 have died of Covid, most of those didn’t die because of Covid.

I shared this on another thread, but here is a useful link for those speculating about what constitutes an underlying condition.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/methodologies/measuringpreexistinghealthconditionsindeathcertificationdeathsinvolvingcovid19march2020

From my reading of this, conditions will only be mentioned on the death certificate if they constitute part of the causal chain that led directly to the death.