Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

What pct of the population do you think has died of COVID?

58 replies

Karenovirus · 29/07/2020 18:11

I read some survey published today showed that people think 10pct of the population has died from COVID

https://www.kekstcnc.com/media/2793/kekstcncresearchhcovid-19opinionntracker_wave-4.pdf

It's a small survey admittedly. And maybe they carried it out with people live under rocks and only watch the BBC. But if people think numbers like this are remotely accurate, no wonder they're scared!

But anyway, what pct of the population do YOU think has died?

OP posts:
AlecTrevelyan006 · 29/07/2020 21:42

@lifesalongsong

What a strange question, what does it matter how many people think? The actual answer will depend on how you set the counting criteria and will certainly be the subject of on going analysis.

What would the point be of me saying I thiink it's 0.000000000000000000001% or 75%, I genuinely don't see where you're going with your question.

it matters what people think because government policy is driven more by what people perceive to be true, rather than what is actually true.
Frazzled13 · 29/07/2020 22:00

What a strange question, what does it matter how many people think?

It matters because perception is important. And also because if people really think 10% of the population have died, 1 in 10 people, then we have a serious problem with critical thinking and basic awareness.

SugarHour · 30/07/2020 08:10

About half as many who died of cancer in the same period.

TheLegendOfZelda · 30/07/2020 08:17

About twice as many as died due to the effects of lockdown alone?

mosquitofeast · 30/07/2020 08:31

@TheLegendOfZelda

About twice as many as died due to the effects of lockdown alone?
no they didn't, a very tiny number died due to the lock down. Many more were saved by the lock down through very low accident figures, very low crime figures, and very low transmission of other deadly diseases, such as flu or glandular fever
mosquitofeast · 30/07/2020 08:32

@SugarHour

About half as many who died of cancer in the same period.
no, covid has more than doubled the death rate in the country. So all other deaths added together don't equal covid deaths
EveningNibble · 30/07/2020 08:39

Approximately 0.067%

TheLegendOfZelda · 30/07/2020 08:41

@TheLegendOfZelda

About twice as many as died due to the effects of lockdown alone?
'Lockdown has killed 21,000 people', say experts Lockdown policy has had "significant unintended consequences” such as lack of access to critical healthcare and a drop in A&E attendances

By Laura Donnelly, Health Editor and Sarah Knapton, Science Editor 29 July 2020 • 9:00pm

Almost 2,700 people a week have died because of the effects of lockdown, analysis of official data suggests.

The study by economists and academics from Sheffield and Loughborough universities suggests more than 21,000 people died as a result of the measures introduced in March. "
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/29/lockdown-has-killed-21000-people-say-experts/

SugarHour · 30/07/2020 08:45

Are you going by excess deaths? According to here: www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/mortality#heading-Zero
"There are around 165,000 cancer deaths in the UK every year, that's around 450 every day"
So that would mean around 80,000 already this year, and covid deaths are around 45,000 iirc.

Happy to be corrected.

SmileTolerantly · 30/07/2020 08:50

Sugar, mosquito, you’re both right depending what you mean by “the period”. Cancer deaths are roughly a quarter of all normal UK deaths. At the peak of the epidemic Covid deaths were roughly doubling that so dwarfing the cancer deaths, but that was for quite a short period. Across the year to date (including January and February of course) Covid deaths are c10% of all deaths so around half of cancer deaths.

Thegereldine3000 · 30/07/2020 08:53

Extremely small, and even smaller than the inflated numbers reported on the news. Ive litteraly seen one funeral in lockdown and I live next to a cemetery and crematorium. In my opinion lockdown was and still is unjustified. Funnily enough the BBC hasn't mentioned the law firms suing the government.

MintChocAddict · 30/07/2020 09:04

The numbers I'd be interested in are how many people will die longer term or be left with chronic health difficulties due to the complications of post Covid.
It seems to have odd effects on various organs that aren't fully understood yet, so I think the long term statistics would be an additional concern.

KittyMcV · 30/07/2020 10:37

@SmileTolerantly

Kitty isn’t quite as wrong as the people saying 10%, but she’s not far off.
Hmm.. I admit I was well out. I was travelling at the time and on phone so just having a guess and throwing my tuppence in. But.... looking at the figures. The UK population is roughly 67886011. The number so far (albeit estimated as many people have pointed out) dying from Covid is 45961. If 10% of the population died of Covid that would be 6788601 people. If my massive underestimation of 0.0002% died of Covid it would be 135 people. So my figure was underestimated by 45826 people. The 10% person overestimated by 6740640 people. I'd say that was pretty far off, don't you?
SengaStrawberry · 30/07/2020 10:39

People are stupid. I did a survey a while back just after lockdown was eased where people thought that the risk of getting Covid in a full room of people was over 50%. I don’t think it was even that at the peak far less after months of suppression measures!

SmileTolerantly · 30/07/2020 10:44

I was looking at how many orders of magnitude you were out Kitty, but in raw headcount I agree you were only tens of thousands out not millions.

Gwynfluff · 30/07/2020 10:47

Still not getting why Germany has had such a low death rate? Even allowing for population density correlation. Though, I know they are very fearful now of a second wave/surge.

KittyMcV · 30/07/2020 10:49

[quote Derbygerbil]@KittyMcV

It’s a myth that many people have deaths recorded as Covid are simply “with” it, rather than “of” it as shown by the following extract from the ONS website:

“ Between 1 March and 30 June 2020, there were 218,837 deaths that occurred in England and Wales and that were registered by 4 July 2020. Over a fifth of these deaths (23.0%) involved the coronavirus (COVID-19) (50,335 deaths). The doctor certifying a death can list all causes in the chain of events that led to the death and pre-existing conditions that may have contributed to the death. Using this information, we determine an underlying cause of death. More information on this process can be found in our user guide. In the majority of cases (46,736 deaths, 92.8%) where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, it was found to be the underlying cause of death.

Our definition of COVID-19 includes some cases where the certifying doctor suspected the death involved COVID-19 but was not certain, for example, because no test was done. Of the 46,736 deaths with an underlying cause of COVID-19, 3,763 (8.1%) were classified as “suspected” COVID-19. Including mentions, “suspected” COVID-19 was recorded on 8.4% (4,251 deaths) of all deaths involving COVID-19.”[/quote]
I stand corrected and this is interesting. I still believe that there are so many confounding variables that we won't know the true picture until much later. My comment was based on something I read or heard which stated that if someone was run over by a bus, but on the post mortem it found they had had Covid in the past number of (I forget) weeks, that it would still be registered as a Covid death. This is obviously incorrect! We are not going to have any really accurate picture until we see what the overall death rate is compared to what normally would have been, and also what the longer-term implications are for those who have been infected but have not died. Would it be possible that people whose lungs have been affected have a subsequent shorter lifespan? There is so much fake information out there at the moment that it's hard to know what to believe any more. All I know is that in my circle, two people have had it and not known until they were tested (as nurses), two people have had it and been very ill, but recovered and one person has been unable to have their cancer surgery because of the limitations to surgery caused by Covid. I am therefore of the opinion that we need to be careful that the 'cure' is not more harmful than the virus itself. I think it's important that we try not to get hysterical, therefore.

SmileTolerantly · 30/07/2020 10:50

...however Kitty’s definition of more and less wrong isn’t necessarily the best way. If the correct answer were 45,000 deaths and person A guesses 100,000 while person B guesses 4 then person B is arithmetically closer to the right answer but I’m not sure they’ve given a better answer.

SengaStrawberry · 30/07/2020 10:53

Even the worst case scenario modelling didn’t have the death rate at 10% of the population.

mosquitofeast · 30/07/2020 12:48

@SengaStrawberry

Even the worst case scenario modelling didn’t have the death rate at 10% of the population.
I think you will find the worst case modelling is the extinction of the human race within 75 years
SengaStrawberry · 30/07/2020 12:51

I’ll be in my 120s by then so won’t worry too much Grin

TheHeathenOfSuburbia · 30/07/2020 13:09

@SengaStrawberry

People are stupid. I did a survey a while back just after lockdown was eased where people thought that the risk of getting Covid in a full room of people was over 50%. I don’t think it was even that at the peak far less after months of suppression measures!
Wellllll... if someone in the room has it, the chance of you getting it could be this high depending on airflow, temp, activity etc. Documented 'superspreader' events have gone over 50% of the room infected.

On the other hand, if no-one in the room has it, there's a 0% chance of you getting it.

So you can't really say 50% is a stupid answer; it's plausible but unlikely.

Depends on the infection rate in the population; if you were in a room with 200 others when 1 in 100 people were infected vs 1 in 100000 people, say...

torydeathdrug · 30/07/2020 13:30

even if Neil Ferguson was correct & without lockdown we'd have had 500k deaths - that's still less than 1% of the population. Not saying that would have been a good thing but it just demonstrates how clueless people are generally.

torydeathdrug · 30/07/2020 13:33

the attack rate is nowhere near 50% - even in households with prolonged close quarter contact e.g. www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30471-0/fulltext

SengaStrawberry · 30/07/2020 13:36

Yeah of course @TheHeathenOfSuburbia but given this was after lockdown and the prevalence was way lower than the 1 in 40 people with it then I’d have thought 50/50 chance of getting it in a crowded room was quite high

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.