Uk hospital now saying covid patients don’t seem as sick as they did at beginning of epidemic

[Blueberryham]

Just saw on yahoo news

@Newjez

Wouldn't believe anything I read on yahoo news

www.hsj.co.uk/news/covid-hospital-deaths-declining-at-record-rate/7027212.article

Believe it now?

That is encouraging. Certainly people seem to be admitted earlier than in April, and hospitals must have developed experience and expertise in treatment.

"A good virus doesn't want to kill its host" - that is a fallacy. If a virus can replicate itself and spread, perhaps the faster the better, then it doesn't matter to it whether or not the host dies. It's irrelevant.

"Wouldn't believe anything I read on yahoo news"

^ it comes from Dr David Rosser who heads the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (the largest hospital trust in England & one of the hardest hit). His quote is

"He added that there could be signs the virus may be weakening, while cautioning that patient numbers were so small it could be a “coincidence”.

Dr Rosser said: “At the peak of the pandemic, for every 43 patients we had in the hospital we had about 10 patients in the ITU. So it’s interesting in that we've got 40-odd patients with active Covid in the hospital and none of them need intensive care.

“I don’t think we understand or have the insights into what that is about, but it’s interesting how current patients don't seem as sick, on average, as they were. That may be just a coincidence – it’s all very small numbers.”

Doctors in Italy, the US & France have noticed the same. I don't know know if anyone understands why at this point - the virus changing, the population getting infected changing, treatment preventing people deteriorating? It's was mentioned on another thread that around 19% of people with covid hospital were in ITU in England, now that's 9% even with new admissions - people in hospital with it are less sick.

it might be a certain strain.

Because the most susceptible have had it, now we are seeing the tail of moderately susceptible representing more of the cases.

How do they know? They tell everyone to stay at home.

@nibdedibble

"A good virus doesn't want to kill its host" - that is a fallacy. If a virus can replicate itself and spread, perhaps the faster the better, then it doesn't matter to it whether or not the host dies. It's irrelevant.

Yes, but a virus is less likely to spread if it’s host is so ill as to be home-bound

Asymptomatic people (or those with mild symptoms who selfishly decide to go about their business anyway) are a lot more likely to spread the virus, meaning that strain is likely to dominate in new hospital admissions

Obviously this theory doesn’t work so well when the virus has been caught in hospital or care home

@marcus242628

Because they are less deficient in vitamin D at this time of year

That’s an interesting point

Ah, Yahoo news - the beacon of truth and accuracy. I don't think so!

Don't believe everything you read on social media.

@ifailed are you Dominic Cummings?!

If this were reported in the Times or the Guardian, I might be inclined to take it more seriously. But this is an anecdotal comment from one or two people. Even if they are telling their own accurate experience, it does NOT form a scientific basis for conjecture about ALL cases.

Scientists disagree too:

www.washingtonpost.com/health/experts-dispute-reports-coronavirus-is-becoming-less-lethal/2020/06/01/8f8ace7c-a432-11ea-b619-3f9133bbb482_story.html

We certainly (along with Italy and East USA) had a more potent strain initially. Whereas, for example West USA and China was a milder strain. Beijing has locked down and has said it now has the more potent strain there. It’s one of the reasons why it’s so difficult to compare countries to one another.

@AllWashedOut that's what I tend to think too. The most susceptible will generally catch it earlier in an epidemic (I've seen that described as the low hanging fruit effect in infectious disease transmission). Not all people are equally likely to contract it if exposed - the attack rate for the virus is much higher in older people for example. And then once infected younger people are more likely not to develop the covid disease & if they do are far less likely to need treatment.

@Jaxhog

If this were reported in the Times or the Guardian, I might be inclined to take it more seriously. But this is an anecdotal comment from one or two people. Even if they are telling their own accurate experience, it does NOT form a scientific basis for conjecture about ALL cases.

Yes, until we see new research on the genome sequencing of the virus, and if it’s mutated into a supposedly weaker strain, there doesn’t seem any point in speculating.

well it's in the Telegraph ... not sure if that counts as a legitimate news source like The Guardian but here's the link for anyone interested!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/19/largest-hospital-trust-first-no-covid-patients-intensive-care/

At the peak of the pandemic, for every 43 patients we had in the hospital we had about 10 patients in the ITU. So it’s interesting in that we've got 40-odd patients with active Covid in the hospital and none of them need intensive care.

Of course, this could be explained by the fact that people are being admitted now who wouldn't have been considered ill enough to be admitted previously.

Let's hope that instead there is a mutation which makes it less severe.

If it was related to vitamin D then countries in the southern hemisphere or just closer to the equator would also have had mild cases in March/April/May.

But they haven't.

Not sure I'd put too much stock in the vitamin D thing.

agree it could be the warmer weather and vitamin d
better treatment options
obviously more shielding, flattened curve

@Ifailed

This is going to sound morbid/uncaring, but maybe those who were most likely to catch it due to poor immunity/hygiene have either had it and died, or are convalescing and shielding? We know the over 80s are mostly likely to get very ill, and they are in relatively short supply now.

I thought that too. My father died, this was always likely to be the outcome given his health; people like him died early on and so people who are getting it now are perhaps the ones who are less susceptible to dying or who have less underlying conditions and a lower viral load. The over 80s are probably being more cautious.

@MorrisZapp

Yahoo news? Have you been surfing 2003 again?

I base all my medical decisions on Yahoo news and badly copied Minions memes!

I am amazed that people still make OPs consisting of a sentence they saw on a website and don't put any link, context or research it themselves.

And lots of posters comment on it as if the OP was a credible news source.

I wonder if the virus has mutated into a less aggressive strain, I mean the virus wont want to kill the host as then it dies as well, so it would make sense to bubble away under the surface without causing too much damage. (Not a scientist but just my thoughts)

Maybe because the vunerable people who are gonna get really sick from this aren't out and about !?
We have been in the house now since 13th March due to vunerable child. Have received notification now that our child won't be able to attend school because they are too high risk
But meanwhile everyone else get back to normal and allow the vunerable to stay locked up just so everyone else can go to the pubs and restaurants and spread it all about again making it unsafe for anyone vunerable to leave the house !
And let's just hope none of these people have underlying health conditions they are unaware of until they contract covid !

I thought I’d heard that this was also the case in Italy a few weeks back ...that symptoms seemed to be weakening as time goes on. I wouldn’t know the scientific reason behind this though.