4,200 children have lost a parent to Covid in New York State.

[ChavvySexPond]

Why do you think 4.200 children in New York State have lost a parent to Covid pushing them into single parent poverty or the care system?

And do you think it will happen here? Or are we protected by having the National Health Service?

uhfnyc.org/news/article/uhf-report-4200-children-nys--lost-parent-covid-19/

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/champ.gothamist.com/champ/gothamist/news/more-children-ny-state-have-lost-parents-due-covid-19-911-attacks

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thecity.nyc/platform/amp/health/2020/9/30/21494764/thousands-of-new-york-children-lost-a-parent-to-covid-19-study-finds

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8791297/amp/More-4-000-New-York-children-lost-parent-coronavirus-report-finds.html

it is very unlikely that someone who would die of an opportunistic viral infection would have many more years to live,

This is wrong. People can have a vulnerability, an Achilles heel, but can be otherwise in very good health, working and productive, for decades.

Why would you be so certain of the opposite? Is it just a general prejudice against people who have some sort of medical history?

@ChavvySexPond - whilst I agree that any child losing a parent to covid 19, or indeed for any reason, is tragic, I disagree profoundly with your argument, “ Still sticking with the false comfort of tiny percentage points over the reality of real numbers and real people, eh?“ I don’t think that is false comfort at all. I find it utterly weird to just focus on numbers. If you did that for everything in life, you’d never be able to cope with the sheer numbers of people who die of anything whatsoever, and would entirely agree with billionaires who argue they should only pay a tiny percentage of their wealth in tax, because a tiny percentage is already a very big number, whereas poor people should pay a huge percentage of their income in tax, because that’s still a tiny number, etc, etc.

Basic numbers also don’t demonstrate the unfairness in who is dying - the higher proportion of people from particular backgrounds, etc.

Where did you get the idea that I'm 'certain' it's the opposite? I said that it could only be proven by the 2020-21 mortality figures.

This is wrong. People can have a vulnerability, an Achilles heel, but can be otherwise in very good health, working and productive, for decades.

They can. A small percentage of them will die; a small percentage of them have died. Only a statistical analysis in the aftermath can determine the magnitude of C19; all you can know now is that C19 has probably brought forward X number of deaths by 6 months or fewer.

@Refractory

So the point at issue is the line of thought often expressed over the summer, that deaths from covid somehow weren't very significant because the people dying would only have had a very short time to live.

I'm very glad that we both agree that this perspective is quite wrong.

@herecomesthsun

It’s not wrong at all. The majority of deaths in the U.K. have occurred in care homes. By definition, these look after people who are at the end of their lives.

Yes, there are people who’ve died in care homes who would have lived longer. But the vast majority of care home residents do not have long left to live to be frank.

Because the vast majority of covid deaths have occurred in older people who obviously will not have high live expectancies, the actual number of years of life lost to COVID may not be high at all.

What gives it meaning is the standard deviation

Bollocks. Not the point and you know it. Stop trying to dodge with words you either don't understand or are using to wilfully miss the point. The OP put the point better than I did a few posts prior and you had no sensible answer there either.

Standard deviation my ass. No that is not what makes it effing significant.

Bollocks. Not the point and you know it. Stop trying to dodge with words you either don't understand or are using to wilfully miss the point. The OP put the point better than I did a few posts prior and you had no sensible answer there either.

What exactly are you talking about?

The standard deviation is precisely what indicates whether there are large variances hiding in an average. In this case, there aren't.

[quote herecomesthsun]@Refractory

So the point at issue is the line of thought often expressed over the summer, that deaths from covid somehow weren't very significant because the people dying would only have had a very short time to live.

I'm very glad that we both agree that this perspective is quite wrong.[/quote]
We don't agree.

"A small percentage will; a small percentage have."

Again, the fact remains that a small percentage of a very large number can still be a large number. So if we let COVID spread through a very large number of children and families on the presumption that they are a low risk group, a large number of parents will still die.

As for the idea that parents who die of COVID wouldn't have otherwise lived for very long anyway -- that just doesn't make any sense. A proportion of otherwise completely healthy people will die, and a larger proportion of the people who die will be in the ECV and CV groups. It is very well documented that a number of the conditions that put a youngish healthy adult in the ECV/CV groups have otherwise favorable outcomes.

You may have decided that the individual risk to you and your family is low and that's fine. But if as you say the most important thing to consider is the numbers, you need to recognise that you cannot generalise your own situation to the larger group of children and families either.

refactory

Read the first line of the post above. Forget standard deviation unless you're a psychopath which I'd like to think you're not. A small percentage of a colossally high number is still s high number. That's meaningful. Unless to you it just.. Isn't. Fortunately I don't think yours is the majority view.

@Whatshouldicallme

And a very small number of younger adults die from flu. As sad as individual cases are, you cannot base policy on a few outliers.

I’m not sure people even know what they are arguing about, here? Any number of young children left bereft of their parents is tragic. I wonder why the focus on covid 19 now if you never got quite so incensed by all the other causes? A fair proportion of the parents dying of covid 19 were also more at risk from dying from other things that were preventable but which society did too little to try to prevent - eg pollution, car accidents, poverty, unequal access to healthcare, etc, etc. Why were deaths from those causes less meaningful?

@Ecosse @Walkaround

Yes, of course parents dying of any cause is tragic. But COVID has the capacity to cause a much higher than usual number of deaths in a short period, and of people who would otherwise not have died.
COVID is much more dangerous than flu. And the fact that people die from other causes surely doesn't mean we shouldn't try to mitigate many more dying on top of that due to COVID, is it?

@Whatshouldicallme

I don’t think anyone is saying we shouldn’t take any mitigation measures. Personally I’d be happy to retain mask wearing, social distancing for this winter. We should also keep some high risk venues like nightclubs closed.

What I don’t support is lockdowns that would devastate our economy and society.

Ok so this study, quoted here in the Telegraph, suggests that people dying of covid lose 13 years if they are male, on average, and 11 years if they are female.

Of course, this topic is the subject of ongoing discussion and will be further monitored.

But there is certainly a strong line of academic thought that people dying of covid are not all about to pop their clogs. On the contrary, there is evidence that covid not uncommonly presents a major insult to people who were formerly quite healthy and had many years of life to live.

I'm sorry that there seem to be so many people who appear keen to minimize the significance of the deaths from covid.

Well, now you are the one sounding callous about the other causes, Whatshouldicallme. Should we only worry about deaths that are well publicised, then? Because huge numbers are dying all at the same time of the other causes around the world now, too.

few outliers

Strange definition of few.

Re what we are arguing about, I am arguing that these deaths matter and shouldn't be written off.

And that as a society we should try and avoid more unnecessary deaths, by intelligent and scientific means.

This doesn't mean another lockdown.

Quite the opposite.

Following the sensible plans in schools adopted on the continent, for example, would defer or prevent another lockdown.

@walkaround

I can't see that @Whatshouldicallme is being callous here. We are discussing a particular issue, which is the covid situation.

There are a lot of other issues that would make the world a better place, and of course they are important to discuss - you could stat some other discussion threads, if you have a passion for justice- but that isn't what we are discussing here.

start not stat

@herecomesthsun

Part time school is simply not a viable solution for many reasons:

1. Parents cannot work if DC are not at school- our economy is on its knees as it is

1. Many DC lack the necessary equipment and space to study at home- educational inequality is a massive issue already and would be even more of a problem

1. Online learning is simply not as effective as face-to-face teaching

@Ecosse, Why are you peddling the the long discredited, seasonal flu line? Why do you think countries all over the world have introduced such prohibitive, economically damaging measures?

I really don't get this sticking your fingers in your ears mentality. You realise that someone you know and love could die if they contract the virus. It is a very 'I'm alright Jack' attitude.

We have no idea of the long term health implications of the virus. Even people seemingly affected mildly have ongoing heart, lung, blood, brain, nerve issues and chronic fatigue.

@Velvian

This line about long covid that the lockdown fanatics keep trotting out is just tiresome.

‘Long COVID’ does not exist- a very small number of people do suffer post-viral syndrome. But this occurs with every virus- it is certainly not unique to COVID.

[quote Ecosse]@herecomesthsun

Part time school is simply not a viable solution for many reasons:

1. Parents cannot work if DC are not at school- our economy is on its knees as it is

1. Many DC lack the necessary equipment and space to study at home- educational inequality is a massive issue already and would be even more of a problem

1. Online learning is simply not as effective as face-to-face teaching[/quote]

I said nothing here about part time school, if you read what I wrote.

There are a lot of alternatives to cramming all the children into classrooms where they will almost inevitably contract covid over the winter.

We could consider exploring a few of them before we have a load more unnecessary deaths of parents and adults working in schools.

Cheers.