417 dead

[Standandwait]

417 people under 40 have died of CV in hospital in England from when the pandemic began to Jan 16, according to the NHS. Another 4,081 under 60 have died.

This is out of 60,921 total deaths NHS England recorded; by comparison, gov.uk counts 89,261 deaths total in England to Jan. 17, but they don’t break it down by age group. The quickest glance at deaths in care homes suggests those basically explain the difference in the two totals. I assume it's possible to come up with comparable figures for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, too -- I just happen to live in England and got tired.

Lord knows, I'm not looking to "kill granny." I have a lot of dearly beloved family over 80, and am closer than not to 60. I also have a disabled child, which means I know not only him but many other very vulnerable families. I have followed lockdown rules quite faithfully, myself.

But I really, really am beginning to have grave reservations about locking down again and again. If you feel otherwise, please talk me around.

If you want to see what uncontrolled transmission looks like, look at Brazil.

Hospitals aren’t full of over 80s. We face two problems: 1) people dying from covid, 2) people dying from other stuff because the hospitals are full of covid patients. You may want to discount the majority of 1, but you’d make 2 even worse.

I'm 43, have asthma and I'm pregnant. So if I died, I wouldn't count in your statistics. Most people who have died were not about to die anyway.

But there are many other illnesses that kill people that 'were not about to die" @AntiHop - We don't lock down for those do we?

I'm on the fence. I can see both sides. But think this is more about saving the underfunded dying NHS rather than the dying people.

Is "under 40" significant in some way? We aren't living in Logan's Run.

I think many people don't understand the seriousness of the situation, as they think they live in a nice safe westenised country, when crap things only happen to others on the news, in far away places. They see lockdown, the virus etc as some annoying piece of goverment policy, that should be changed, because they don't like it. They don't get it and they think they can control it with their ideas.

We are nearly a year into this pandemic and still there are posts like this.

Surely you have seen all the same news bulletins and newspapers as everyone else?

You must know about the nhs being overwhelmed, so I’m curious why you’re not worried about that and didn’t mention it in your OP.

But think this is more about saving the underfunded dying NHS rather than the dying people.

Well yes. That's what everyone has been saying since last March - you might remember the Government slogan 'protect the NHS'

"But there are many other illnesses that kill people that 'were not about to die" @AntiHop - We don't lock down for those do we?"

No, because none of them are a pandemic, with the power to overwhelm any health service @Elephant4.

Our icu has 15 beds with 22 icu patients in it and high levels of staff sickness. If we don’t lock down this will be worse and more planned operations will be further delayed so people will die of cancer etc because you can’t find a bed for recovery from a biopsy because it’s full with a patient who can’t breathe due to covid. What do you say? Cancer trumps covid so send covid patients home to die and save the cancer patients?

I can't be fucked talking you round. You seem to be yet another person who thinks that the lives of the old and or vulnerable are somehow worth less than other peoples. And who still doesn't get that its not at all just about deaths.
I don't care what you think about lockdowns, you don't get a choice in the matter. People far smarter than you are saying this is what we need to do, so put your mask on, keep your opinions to yourself, and get on with it.

Do you think Chris whitty doesn't know these stats? They know this and have decided this is the best thing to do, mostly because 10% of over fifties/sixties require oxygen to survive and if they didn't provide that and they didn't lock down, hundreds of thousands would be dead.

The other reasons for mitigation is long covid - 10% of the population might become disabled if we let us all get it. And the fact that if we lifted all restrictions, because it grows exponentially, things like food chains would collapse as everyone would get ill together.

Elephant

“ But think this is more about saving the underfunded dying NHS rather than the dying people.”

I think the nhs is chronically underfunded but to be blunt, uncontrolled transmission will rapidly overwhelm any healthcare system.

Hence, why governments around the world, with a variety of healthcare systems have locked down.

Have you also got the statistics on how many NHS staff have PTSD from what they are dealing with every day?

We have a vaccine, a way out of this. Let's not wish another wave of this shit on our frontline staff when it can be avoided.

@Elephant4

I'm 43, have asthma and I'm pregnant. So if I died, I wouldn't count in your statistics. Most people who have died were not about to die anyway.

But there are many other illnesses that kill people that 'were not about to die" @AntiHop - We don't lock down for those do we?

I'm on the fence. I can see both sides. But think this is more about saving the underfunded dying NHS rather than the dying people.

We don't lock down for those do we?

We don't need to. They aren't a highly contagious new disease spreading among a global population with no immunity, and they don't kill the doctors and nurses treating the patients.

I thought at one time the same as you. But then I caught it, and whilst not hospitalised, I am still suffering the affects of it months later, now labelled as ‘long covid’, and many others are the same. It’s not always a case of you having it, getting over it and life back to normal I’m afraid.

Apart from anything else 60 is bloody young. It is below retirement age .
I think it is horrible to discount the deaths of over 60s in this way.
Have others who have given far more eloquent explanations convinced you OP?

It isn't the number of deaths in the under 40 or under 60 categories.

To the government, the critical thing is the state of the hospitals - overfull, staff under horrific strain and thousands off sick, rationing oxygen, having others die of non-covid illnesses because they can't treat them.

To ordinary citizens, the prospect of long covid should terrify you. What about people like Derek Draper - in hospital 10 months, unimaginable suffering. Thousands with long covid. How would your child cope if you had long covid?

* But think this is more about saving the underfunded dying NHS rather than the dying people.

Well yes. That's what everyone has been saying since last March - you might remember the Government slogan 'protect the NHS' hmm*

Sorry - what I mean by the first bit @titchy is - if our NHS had been better funded and in a better place to start with (prior to the pandemic) we might not have to lockdown now.

We are locking down now because the NHS was brought to it's knees by austerity. There is a huge shortage of staff as part of that.

If our NHS was in a better place we might be able to keep going nearer to normal for longer. I don't believe for one second that our government cares to save lives. It is panicking about what this will look like/optics when the NHS completely collapses.

It's not just death you want to worry about.
How about long-covid. Michael Rosen has been open about losing the sight in one eye, and hearing in one ear. I've seen cases of teenagers with sight loss as the virus attacked the nerve cells in her eye.
And even if you are asymptomatic, your lungs could be damaged - and you might not even know...
twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1350612735860600841

All of the problems associated with lockdown could be solved if we had a half-decent government. Supporting families financially, providing proper mental health support, investing in the changes our society needs. Instead, billions have been paid to the friends of those in Cabinet, with no benefit to the people who need it.

Lock down sucks. But getting COVID is worse.

But presumably many people under 40 or under 60 have been saved by hospital treatment, which is what lockdowns ensure is still available.

This exactly. OP; with no lockdowns those ICU units will be swamped right away. And then all those under 60s and under 40s who can be saved by ICU treatment will die, as will car crash victims and stroke patients and heart attack victims and everyone else who needs an ICU bed when THERE SIMPLY ARE NONE LEFT.

I despair. This is not rocket science. This is pure calculation; available ICU beds vs people who need them.

I can hardly believe the choice of thread title you made. Macabre.
All of the statistics were people. Many more are shattered to lose them and/or worried about those they know who are very unwell.

@everythingthelighttouches

We are nearly a year into this pandemic and still there are posts like this.

Surely you have seen all the same news bulletins and newspapers as everyone else?

You must know about the nhs being overwhelmed, so I’m curious why you’re not worried about that and didn’t mention it in your OP.

my thoughts too

Also don't forget the immense burden to the individual and to the health budget of long Covid and post ITU health complications. It's about time this was included in the daily updates to help the doubters understand.

www.ons.gov.uk/news/statementsandletters/theprevalenceoflongcovidsymptomsandcovid19complications

Do you honestly think we'd have lockdowns if it was just the over 80s on their last legs that it was knocking off? The same sort of people who cop it with flu every year?

It's the young people who are economically active they are worried about. And trying to make sure people get treatment when they need it.

If they broke it down this way even more bell ends would be out and about cracking on and the NHS wouldn't cope.

Just accept the fact we all need to stay the fuck home right now.