Does anyone know the SURVIVAL rate of CV-19?

[FluWorldOrder]

Or where I can find this information?

All I see and hear day in and day out are what feel like fear mongering stories in the press.

We are told asymptomatic transmission occurs and yet apparently we will be struck down in the prime of our lives by this virus. So if we can have the virus and have no symptoms of it how does this work? Presumably we will have some symptoms if we’re on deaths door.

Anyway, does anyone know where I can find the statistics on survival rather than focusing on death, death, death?

@hamstersarse That is exactly how I feel. We seem to have collectively lost all ability to appraise risk.

@RunnerDown

Long Covid is not a reason to destroy people's livelihoods, jobs, education and wellbeing.

It just isn't.

Much love to all suffering. I for one am pretty angry about the whole thing having just left New Zealand for the UK in February of 2020, prearranged and not much choice in the matter for various reasons. I’m sorry but asking questions doesn’t make you a conspiracy theorist. So ridiculous and childish. And besides that term was created by the CIA when people started to question the assassination of JFK so there’s that!

EXACTLY! If I could write it bigger I would. Ultimately our own health is our own responsibility, not the governments.

IFR by age here:

gh.bmj.com/content/bmjgh/5/9/e003094.full.pdf

Argh last comment in response to hamstersarse. Shutting everything down in case people have side effects from a virus is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.

@MrsHastingslikethebattle

An average Brit's chance of dying 'with Covid' today was about 1 in 2 million (1 in 2,060,000)

That's 33 deaths.

And of dying of anything else about 1 in 42,000.

That's 1,600 deaths

68,000,000 of us, (27,600,000 already jabbed!) remain Locked Down to 'Protect the NHS'.

33 is encouragingly low, but Sunday numbers are always the lowest of the week, so you’re better off looking at the rolling 7 day average which is about 90.

This has come down from a peak of over 1,200 in January, ie 75% the size of all other deaths combined. So yes, locking down the entire population in combination with a vaccine programme taking effect has worked well, and we’re about to start opening up again. That’s the point.

@ExcusesAndAccusations

It might be the point, but we are already 11 weeks into this lockdown and we might get our lives back on 21st June. That is another 13 weeks away.

Data not dates was the mantra.

@ExcusesAndAccusations Hmmm... I may have done my math wrong but wouldn’t that mean that even at the peak the risk of dying from covid was around the same as the risk of dying of anything else?

@murbblurb

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

That is absolute hyperbole.

4.3m have had the virus in the population

27 million have been vaccinated

We will not lose our utilities, food supply chain or whatever it is that the NHS now does (does it do anything other than Covid?). Most people who are left would only be off work for a few days... because they are not likely to get very sick from it.

[quote hamstersarse]@ExcusesAndAccusations

It might be the point, but we are already 11 weeks into this lockdown and we might get our lives back on 21st June. That is another 13 weeks away.

Data not dates was the mantra.[/quote]
Yes, based on data I’m really not sure that the lockdown can be justified for much longer. The dates do seem a bit stretched out and I know this was done to allow us to see the impact of different restrictions being lifted but if we only have a few people in hospital in a few weeks time it seems very unreasonable to continue to proceed with such caution.

@hamstersarse It’s not the lockdown that causes the problems it’s the virus. And it’s not just long COVID. If the virus is allowed to rage the health service is overwhelmed and ill people can’t be treated . So you have a much higher death count both because of lack of treatment and many more people affected.
Have you read about Brazil where they didn’t lock down . More than 287000 deaths . www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/19/brazil-coronavirus-intensive-care-unit-capacity

[quote RunnerDown]@hamstersarse It’s not the lockdown that causes the problems it’s the virus. And it’s not just long COVID. If the virus is allowed to rage the health service is overwhelmed and ill people can’t be treated . So you have a much higher death count both because of lack of treatment and many more people affected.
Have you read about Brazil where they didn’t lock down . More than 287000 deaths . www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/19/brazil-coronavirus-intensive-care-unit-capacity[/quote]
I have heard all the arguments for lockdown. Many many times. They are extremely uncompelling. And are only compelling if you look very short-term and only with the single issue lens of Covid.

We are somehow in a position where lockdown was the only solution.

Why is hospitality still closed? Even if I take your point that restrictions were needed, there is not one scrap of evidence that hospiatlity opening like they did last summer would cause any issues.

The same with non-essential shops - not one scrap of evidence that they need to remain shut and were big contributors to the spread.

Yet every day that this goes on, more and more of them go out of business, and people lose their jobs and livelihoods.

And outdoor sport/activities. I have no idea why these weren’t allowed to start back sooner. Mental and physical health has taken a massive hit during lockdown.

Shutting down the entire globe for a virus with over 99% survival rate? Ok then, makes sense

Well our local hospital is overwhelmed

People are on ventilators without visitors.

They have closed other departments so staff can attend to those unlucky few.

If in lockdown we still have an overwhelmed hospital - imagine how much worse it would be without?

Can we risk a higher number of people not receiving medical assistance because there are no beds or facilities to cope?

So yes a time % BUT it would be a lot higher without lock down.

@BluebellsGreenbells

Shutting down the entire globe for a virus with over 99% survival rate? Ok then, makes sense

Well our local hospital is overwhelmed

People are on ventilators without visitors.

They have closed other departments so staff can attend to those unlucky few.

If in lockdown we still have an overwhelmed hospital - imagine how much worse it would be without?

Can we risk a higher number of people not receiving medical assistance because there are no beds or facilities to cope?

So yes a time % BUT it would be a lot higher without lock down.

Where in the country are you out of curiosity? I thought we were back to septemberish levels of patients in hospital

www.gov.uk/government/publications/transmission-risk-in-the-hospitality-sector/transmission-risk-in-the-hospitality-sector

Shutting down the entire globe for a virus with over 99% survival rate? Ok then, makes sense

If you're happy that we don't bother to try and treat the 1% who need treatment you'd make a very valid point. Would you be happy with that? Genuine question btw.

Don't forget that the rate of survival will include patients that have gone to ICU, been intubated and survived. Or those given oxygen. If these services didn't exist, the rate would be much higher.

Much of the effort around keeping the rate low, is to make sure we don't overwhelm these critical services.
Imagine if we had a backlog of sick people and the services were full to capacity (which could have been the case for a lot of last year). Many of those extra patients would die. Being unable to breathe something where medical treatment is critical.

Jeez, someone being called an anti vaxxer for wanting to understand why they need a vaccine. Everyone should know the covid survival rate before getting it, its called informed consent and you have a right to exercise it.

It's not though, @millenialblush. If you read the original post, it's very clear that OP's opinion was completely and firmly made up before seeing the facts.

OP just wanted facts to back up her own inner narrative, she doesn't care about the facts that discredit it.

But the facts dont discredit it...

@MrsHastingslikethebattle

An average Brit's chance of dying 'with Covid' today was about 1 in 2 million (1 in 2,060,000)

That's 33 deaths.

And of dying of anything else about 1 in 42,000.

That's 1,600 deaths

68,000,000 of us, (27,600,000 already jabbed!) remain Locked Down to 'Protect the NHS'.

Except that your chance of dying is only as low as 1 in 2 million because we locked down.

At the height of the peak during this last lockdown there were over 1,200 deaths a day from covid and it would have continued rising had we not locked down.

Presumably you’re ok with 40+% of all deaths being from covid and 60 being from all other causes combined. At what point do you think locking down to prevent spread might be a good idea? 50/50? 60% covid, 40% everything else. 75/25?

Jesus Wept! Why do threads have to get SO bitchy on here!? Unbelievable.