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.

@Mintychoc1 100%, this so true and women.

I have psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Both are immunosuppressive conditions. The additional treatment is also often a risk factor too and if you add steroids, another common treatment for them, can push you into the shielding category.

However, although I have the ' underlying condition' and I am at greater risk from covid, I would not expect it to reduce my life expectancy.

Alsohuman - what proportion of the older population do you think lives in care homes?

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.

@AlecTrevelyan006 you're an arsehole. Yes this will get deleted but worth it. The over 60s are living breathing people with families and valuable lives.

user1471439240 care home recorded deaths are not just those in the older age bracket. Care home data round deaths included those with mental health issues in supported living or residential care who are between 18-55, also people with LD or Autism who are in supported living etc So dont assume care home deaths are elderly

relatives had it 90s, dementia, stroke.....

no symptoms in a care home. in fact 28 out of 30 tested positive NO symptoms.

There was also a case of a 'child with no health problems' in the early phase, turns out he was in the obese category, and a teen...BAME as well...but not mentioned. "Fit and healthy".

@MrsPerks

Alsohuman - what proportion of the older population do you think lives in care homes?

I mentioned care homes because I was responding directly to someone who mentioned them. I even quoted them, ffs.

Yet another thread of this kind I see.

Can you tell me:

• what percentage of under 40s are in the 1 in 20 who are sick for at least 10 weeks and counting?

• Also can you tell me how many had strokes?

_How many had heart attacks and how many have been left with medium to long-term disabilities?

• Also what proportion of people with the virus who are in this category have been hospitalised and how long for?

• And if the NHS had been/is overrun who would that have affected their chances of survival?

It's clear that not being listed as recovered is not as straightforward as not dying and then being the same as before!

But the focus on deaths from a second wave may miss the real toll of the virus: the long-term damage it can cause to the lungs, heart, kidneys, brain and even blood vessels among those who recover. This is emerging as one of the horrors of Covid-19. It is often forgotten that Covid-19 is a new virus, completely different to the flu, and that it might have longer-term health impacts that will only be identified in months or years.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/11/pandemic-scientists-second-wave-coronavirus

Also what can you tell us about the asymptomatic children later found to have had pneumonia in the US? And what impact that may have on their future health prospect?

It's about accurately understanding the risk of different groups to make decisions about how to open up different segments of society, and to balance the benefits and harms of continued lockdown.

Under normal circumstances we don't throw everything at trying to prevent every death. So we could choose to fund the NHS and elderly care more, reduce speed limits, make vaccinations compulsory, outlaw smoking and alcohol, but we don't because as a society we balance the savings of lives against other priorities. So it is normal to have a discussion about how much we prioritise reducing deaths from covid19 vs the harms of those actions.

Under 45s with AND without underlying conditions have a very, very low risk of dying and hospital admission from covid19. The risk of death is very correlated with age, with male sex being the second most significant risk factor. Apart from the shielding conditions, most underlying conditions have only a small extra risk of death, so it's not that if you have asthma you will die from covid. Being male is more risky than most underlying conditions.

It seems crazy to keep kids out of full time education for an extended period of time when the risk to most children, parents and teachers is tiny. There are ways this can be worked to reduce (but not eliminate) the risk to the more vulnerable, predominantly older groups.

Alternatively if we choose to keep kids out of education for an extended period, that will have long-term harms too. If children grow up less educated, less socially and emotionally developed, that will have very grave harms for all of society in the future, so I don't think that is a decision to take lightly.

I like this blog on the subject of assessing risks around opening schools by a Public Health doctor:
blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/06/02/sebastian-walsh-we-are-asking-the-wrong-questions-about-easing-lockdown/?fbclid=IwAR0tddDArvQn4862FP-1Nb5XE59IVrUiidXMUZoDcpwhrckcApa2m6c106g

I still think it would be useful to know the risks to each age group as we come out of lockdown. If you inform people of the real risk levels, it at least allows them to make an informed decision based on their own personal set of circumstances.

I have worked through out the pandemic, with an increased risk level due to having a BMI of over 40, to me the risk level wasn't significant enough to prevent me from working. That was my decision based on my personal level of risk.

I am not pro or anti lockdown. I like most people would love to see a return to some sort of normality in the near future, but it is disingenuous to pretend that lockdown didn't have a significant effect on the number of cases and deaths we have experienced in the UK.

I know someone who died who is being touted as fit and healthy on SM.
She wasn’t.
We’ve been expecting her death for some time.
Her close family are devestated of course, especially as they couldn’t even have a proper funeral. Especially as they can’t hug and comfort each other during lock down.

The people using her as a payer girl for his we should all be terrified of COVID are disgusting opportunists.

runrunrunrunt so agree with you. And see that despite the thread recently started by a vulnerable OP, (and the vulnerable category runs into millions) asking that posters stop the ageism, the dismissal of those with health conditions, recovering or being treated for other illnesses that now make them vulnerable, that someone has started yet another thread designed to encourage just that kind of dismissive attitude. And see that it is already riddled with grade A arseholes making the usual, offensive comments. Maybe when one of them or their children develops a vulnerability or someone they know who's recovering from cancer instead dies from Coronavirus they might reconsider their remarks. But then again toxic people tend to be toxic to the core!

The hysterical ones claim they know everyone that's died it adds to their story to keep us all hiding away
You do realise that some people love it the death the doom the screaming at people just having a day at the beach 'murderers'
The you can't open schools ii's not safe brigade you will kill the teachers. Someone even said that teachers will be thrown under the bus and die in huge numbers when schools started to go back for year 6's - it didn't happen

The second wavers - they keep predicting it but it hasn't happened

They must hate that people are wising up and realising that for under 45's it really isn't a killer

"I would suggest the case of your neighbour is extremely rare!"

I would suggest that you have no information to back that up. Most auto-immune conditions will be considered as a factor. Particularly if medicated as pps have been along to tell you.

Anyway, my neighbour was well over 45. At 62 she'd had a good innings

At 62 she'd had a good innings

Good innings at 62?
Hopefully that's a sarcastic comment against those claiming older people's lives aren't as important.

I too am amazed at the mumsnetters claiming to know of relatively young people dying of Covid. I don't know of a single person.

I suspect some of these "mumsnetters" have been planted here to spread misinformation, while some are scaremongering.

...across 7 countries up to 19th May, there had been 44 Covid deaths recorded out of over 137 million 0–19 year-olds, a rate of less than 1 in 3 million, while this same group suffered over 1000 deaths from accidents over this same period.

I can back that up actually considering neither psoriasis or arthritis are on the list of the most common underlying conditions that have appeared on death certificates which someone has already posted twice on this thread!

@movinggoalposts

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.

I do sympathise. It took me about a year to recover from pneumonia and I felt like shit. We've just forgotten about convalescence. These things take a long time.

My healthy Dd (15) had an (unknown) viral brain infection a few months ago and is still having seizures several times a day. We don’t know if it was Covid19. However there is now evidence Covid19 is causing brain infections in all age ranges. So, like previous posters have said, it’s not just deaths you have to factor in. She’s been hospitalised for quiet a while but we are managing the condition at home now.

Whatever the number or the cause, it’s too many.

@Ohdearfindingthisboringnow that figure is staggering isnt it. Meanwhile children are locked up not developing immune systems making them more vulnerable to other viruses which are more dangerous to them. When my son was 9 weeks old he ended up in hospital on oxygen and a feeding tube due to RSV which he developed after catching a cold from his brother. There are other risks out there especially for children

If only schools only included people under 45 with no underlying health conditions

But they mostly do. The majority should be allowed to return and receive an education. The current situation is an overreaction. Anyone vulnerable needs to protect themselves. It’s not fair but that’s life.

You don't seem to realise that a third that's one in three of the UK workforce is over 50?

It's a huge number of people:

10,050,000 over 50s in employment - the equivalent of the population of Sweden.

www.ageing-better.org.uk/news/number-over-50s-uk-workforce-10-million

@MrsPerks

As an 84 year old woman you have an average life expectancy of 91. Losing 7 years of your life is a pretty bad outcome.

As an 84 year old woman you have exceeded the life expectancy of a woman in the UK already. Not bad going really.