Rise in young women being admitted to hospital

[Char2015]

Reported by Sky News:

An expert has said more women aged 20 to 40 are being admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

Professor Calum Semple, professor of child health and outbreak medicine at the University of Liverpool, said the rise could be attributed to work and caring responsibilities.

"It does really show that this is not just a problem of the frail elderly, this is a problem that can affect people between 20 and 40 just as well," he told BBC Breakfast.

"These people will be working in hospitality. Also in caring roles, some will be parents of school children. It's mainly to do with their public sector and public facing roles."

I think people just want to work out what is going on.

If you want more information to figure out if this makes you more at risk, then you should really think about why that would matter to your day-to-day life. You should be careful about covid, not just because it suddenly might include you as an at-risk person. Other peoples lives and health are just as important as yours.

@Orangeblossom7777

I think people just want to work out what is going on.

There is a pandemic on that kills people, not ONLY the elderly and vulnerable. There is more information in the world about this than UK news and UK politics.

Em, I meant specifically, with these younger women...

@Southernsoftie76

“I so hope more people follow the guidelines but judging by the Christmas thread sadly not. People bleating if they can’t have their usual 20 round the table Christmas Day their mental health will suffer, what utter bollocks. I’m angry with so much selfishness”

I completely agree with this, that thread makes me want to weep.

Can't you see that you are trying to use this to "other"? It means that it would be better if everyone, also women age 20-40 be careful regarding covid because nobody is safe

@rorosemary

But it’s not significant at all, certainly there are no links that the OP has come up with, despite being asked.

No body is safe 100% of time with regards to every health condition known to man though.

There’s always going to be the odd cases that don’t follow the norm and are unexpected.

You baby just start a thread with no evidence at all and expect no one to question their source/data

cant

@pooiepooie25

You missed the key word “mortality”.

@TableFlowerss

*Oh well that's alright thenhmm*

@bumblingbovine49

Yes indeed, as we already know it affects the vulnerable etc so that’s not a news flash.

Healthy 20-40 year old women being struck down is almost unheard of so of course its statistically significant!!!

It’s not “almost unheard of” for previously healthy young women/men to become seriously unwell from any viral infection. It’s uncommon but it happens.

It’s not “almost unheard of” for previously healthy young women/men to become seriously unwell from any viral infection. It’s uncommon but it happens

@Schuyler

I’ll meet you half way..... it’s very uncommon.

@TableFlowerss

Excellent!
I like you!!

I honestly don’t get it, why is it supposed to be a bad thing to want to keep your job?? Ergo the kids need to stay in school as that is how most people manage to work, unless they have a nanny which you can’t usually arrange at short notice. If people don’t work then after six months they could easily be unable to afford the mortgage. What are they supposed to do!?

[quote Schuyler]@TableFlowerss

Excellent!
I like you!! [/quote]

www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.21.20196428v1

This study from Scotland (pre print, yes I know) actually found that living with young children reduced risk of testing positive and of hospitalisation

Jrob

Worth noting that in the competing interests section - one of the authors owns two nurseries.

Also, this study was conducted during the 'first wave' they say - so when children were out of school.

It also seems they haven't fully been able to ensure that their findings are not due to part-time work / working fewer hours (i.e. lower exposure).

They might find a different (or opposite) result now children are in school. Interesting nonetheless.

More scaremongering !

@Pomegranatepompom

Most schools around here have only been back 2 weeks. More info requires - most care workers/hospitality are in the age bracket. Why assume schools?

It’s been 22 days since I went back. 20 days for the children.

@IloveJKRowling

Jrob

Worth noting that in the competing interests section - one of the authors owns two nurseries.

Also, this study was conducted during the 'first wave' they say - so when children were out of school.

It also seems they haven't fully been able to ensure that their findings are not due to part-time work / working fewer hours (i.e. lower exposure).

They might find a different (or opposite) result now children are in school. Interesting nonetheless.

Possibly but the study is households with health care workers so are more likely to be exposed regardless of kids being in school or not.

Our schools went back on 8th. The rise of infections is since early August coinciding with lots of things opening up in July.
Let’s see the evidence in the coming weeks re schools.

@Pomegranatepompom

Our schools went back on 8th. The rise of infections is since early August coinciding with lots of things opening up in July. Let’s see the evidence in the coming weeks re schools.

That might be when the children went back. What about the staff, who are often women under 40.

There seems to be such an appetite to find schools the cause. Yes it could be schools, it could equally be hospitality/care staff/hair dressers. More information is needed.

It's because this virus is mild in some and horrible in others. There are factors why some suffer more but you can be young, slim and healthy and still get shafted by Covid. That's why we should all be wary of catching it.

The reason the appetite is schools is because no masks, no SD and all crammed together! This doesn't happen anywhere else!

It does though - there have been lots of examples in bars/restaurants/ private parties. People have not been sticking to
SD sadly.