Why is the UK getting more cases than France?

[TheYearOfSmallThings]

The UK started vaccinating before France, and there has been a lot of vaccine resistance in France. But their Delta wave was smaller, and continues to decline after peaking, whereas the UK's has plateaued. Life is fairly normal in both countries now.

I'm sure there is an explanation for this that I'm missing, and I'm hoping this board is the place to find it?

@Wildewoodz

The UK’s positivity rate is not below 5%.

England 8.3%
Scotland 12.6%
Wales 19%
NI 6.4%

Possibly. I got it off Our world in data. I don't know where they've got that number from.

They are saying 3.5% for the UK. I've no idea where they have that from given the figure on the daily dashboard.

@mrshoho I certainly think that comparing excess death rates between countries will be quite telling. However, I certainly wouldn't see it as the only measure of success. Number of cases of long Covid will also be an important measure I think, as well as how well the government did at at keeping schools open and operating relatively normally (eg not officially open, but with children hardly attending due to multiple periods of isolation, or open but with lots of teachers on long-term sick leave due to long Covid).

@Watapalava

France currently has 11,000 patients in hospital compared to 9000 here and double our ICU

Figures are not as they seem

The UK dashboard ones almost certainly aren't. I strongly suspect they are covid positive patients, not the total number of patients in hospital because of covid. So if you;ve had covid for more than a set amount of time you drop off the in hospital stats regardless of whether you are still in hospital or not.

The French dashboard isn't exactly helpful about what their figure is measuring either.

@Watapalava International comparisons of hospital admissions also need to be approached with caution, as countries with more spare capacity in their system than the NHS may have a lower threshold for what level of symptoms warrants hospital admission.

This theorising about those admitted with or because of Covid is more complicated than you “strongly suspect”. Seven year old nephew went to hospital with kidney trouble, tested positive, turned out Covid was damaging kidneys. Great auntie went with a stroke tested positive, but Covid caused the stroke. It’s an inflammatory disease that affects the organs and can cause or contribute to other things. Still caused by Covid.

I'd argue that even within the NHS there may well be different thresholds depending on the state of each individual hospital and nearby hospitals at the time.

[quote LilyPond2]@Watapalava International comparisons of hospital admissions also need to be approached with caution, as countries with more spare capacity in their system than the NHS may have a lower threshold for what level of symptoms warrants hospital admission.[/quote]
This is a good point.

Same goes for comparing different countries/cultures and lockdowns. Some countries behaved as carefully we do under lockdown with just advice in place.

@Roisinberry

This theorising about those admitted with or because of Covid is more complicated than you “strongly suspect”. Seven year old nephew went to hospital with kidney trouble, tested positive, turned out Covid was damaging kidneys. Great auntie went with a stroke tested positive, but Covid caused the stroke. It’s an inflammatory disease that affects the organs and can cause or contribute to other things. Still caused by Covid.

That was what I meant. I suspect it's an undercount because in reality it's a lot more complicated.

I wasn't talking about the distinction between with or from because looking at the NHS descriptors for 'with' it's likely to include a lot of people who wouldn't be in hospital if they hadn't caught covid. Similarly, it counts covid patients as 'within 14 days of a positive test'. It does count if they are still being treated for 'symptoms of covid' after that, but I think it's reasonable to suspect that patients still in hospital because of complications of covid might not be being counted.

The with/from distinction is largely pointless IMHO and was done as a distraction.

www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker?gclid=CjwKCAjwhOyJBhA4EiwAEcJdcaS8SMIz4v7aFBpAT2LUWTV3C8x3sTSZ-vy9G3MqpBUS0Q5dk9yVSBoCaz4QAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

These stats put us in a better position than Italy and Spain in terms of excess deaths but not as good as France. Germany appears far better as is Sweden. Interesting to see the countries with a negative excess death rate.

Looking back to early 2020 there and how expected deaths were below average in many places. Having a good winter and expecting them to stay like that through 2020 seems like a lifetime away.

mrshoho that link is fascinating! I don't really understand the graph but the table at the bottom which states the number of reported Covid deaths against the number of excess deaths for each country is insane! The majority of countries are wrong by 1000s (assuming that the implication is that excess deaths actually = covid deaths? Unfortunately, it probably includes a lot of covid related suicide and poverty and medical delay deaths too but arguably you could say those count?)

How have we all got it so wrong in different directions?!

It seems, in general, that the countries with the highest reported Covid deaths per capita (Peru, Hungary, Czech Republic, Montenegro etc) have counted the most accurately.

But countries with a relatively high reported death rate (UK, France, Brazil etc) tend to have over estimated the deaths.

Whereas the ones that have always been weirdly low (Mexico, Russia, South Africa) have of course wildly underestimated their deaths.

Can't see India on the list.

I wonder if comparable countries would all end up with similar deaths per capita if we were able to determine numbers accurately.

Of course France counts care homes! In fact since the beginning they've made a point of reporting covid deaths, of which x in care homes. Don't believe everything you read on the internet!!!!

France only counts care homes once a week (but for the whole week on that day) or certainly used to do better to look at their weekly deaths than compare daily figures. It’s a bit like ours being low on a Sunday/ Monday high on a Tuesday. Daily reporting is lumpy in both countries.

@LilyPond2

Regarding death comparisons, looking at a country's excess deaths compared to the equivalent period pre-Covid will often be a good way of comparing (provided of course that there was no other factor that came on the scene at the same time as Covid and significantly impacted death rate). NB Don't expect to see the UK government encouraging us to compare excess death rates with our European neighbours...

Agree excess deaths is best to look at

Although we are not the highest in Europe, a few higher

Lilypond on the link mrshoho shared our excess deaths are fewer than our reported Covid deaths.

@Roisinberry

This theorising about those admitted with or because of Covid is more complicated than you “strongly suspect”. Seven year old nephew went to hospital with kidney trouble, tested positive, turned out Covid was damaging kidneys. Great auntie went with a stroke tested positive, but Covid caused the stroke. It’s an inflammatory disease that affects the organs and can cause or contribute to other things. Still caused by Covid.

I'm so sorry about your nephew and great aunt

There was a study reported on in the week. Covid is causing kidney damage in many people - including those who had initial mild infections.

Death is not the only thing to worry about. A high number of cases means a lot of people potentially suffering long term or permanent illness and disability.

It might be a decade before the true extent of the harm becomes apparent. Kidney damage, for example, can often go undetected - with symptoms misdiagnosed as stress or general aches and pains - until it's an advanced stage.

Oh, and the answer to the OP. France is actually doing something to protect lives and long term health. It's opening up - but (and here's the key) actively taking mitigation measures:

• Mandatory masks in indoor public spaces (including schools)

• Vaccine mandates for restaurants and other public venues

• Vaccinating children over 12.

• France has already started it's booster programme - 65+, and younger people with underlying conditions.

It makes a difference.

Yes, I can see that the extra measures add up. I think I had underestimated the differences because the French friends visiting us in London felt things were similar. But at the same time, their 13 year old is vaccinated, and his grandmother will be getting a booster soon...

It might be a decade before the true extent of the harm becomes apparent. Kidney damage, for example, can often go undetected - with symptoms misdiagnosed as stress or general aches and pains - until it's an advanced stage

I agree and not just kidney damage. There are concerns with increases in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes amongst others.

We won't really know the implications until years down the line. At the back of my mind I do find it peculiar that China continues to go all out to quash infections with brute force whilst we and many other western countries have given up attempting to keep infections as low as possible. I'm not for a minute suggesting China's approach should have been taken here but why are they going to those extreme lengths?

All countries are clearly at different stages.

We have a clear end goal. We dropped all restrictions (whether you agree with this or not). To get an exit wave over with in Summer. We don’t know whether this will mean Winter will be better than it would have been if we’d kept restrictions and pushed the exit wave to another time.

French residents. Is there an exit strategy or is it masks for the foreseeable? Until all over 12s are vaccinated or will children carry on wearing masks even when they’re vaccinated?

I was enjoying this thread as a discussion about the strategies of other countries and it’s useful to try and see what has worked in other places and what hasn’t. Are countries who are keeping mitigations delaying the inevitable?

It would be nice if it didn’t go the same way as so many threads on here.

We won't really know the implications until years down the line. At the back of my mind I do find it peculiar that China continues to go all out to quash infections with brute force whilst we and many other western countries have given up attempting to keep infections as low as possible. I'm not for a minute suggesting China's approach should have been taken here butwhyare they going to those extreme lengths?

I hear you, but China also started with a vaccine last summer, months before any Western country.

Although excess death figures can also be skewed depending on the health service, so within that number of excess deaths there may be people whose treatments were delayed or whose unrelated conditions were diagnosed too late together with COVID deaths. The person I lost during this would fall into that category . Countries whose health systems were more overwhelmed would show higher excess deaths (Mexico?) for that reason than those (eg Germany) whose health systems could cope well with COVID alongside the other stuff.

I guess COVID is still responsible (directly or indirectly) for the deaths but not in a comparable way.

The grass is always greener eh?

I hear you, but China also started with a vaccine last summer, months before any Western country.

Yes I believe they've dished out a mind boggling 2billion doses. And yet they are still expending so much time and energy in shutting down each and every case. They are still locking down (literally) whole areas. When will it end? What are they waiting for?

@mrshoho

It might be a decade before the true extent of the harm becomes apparent. Kidney damage, for example, can often go undetected - with symptoms misdiagnosed as stress or general aches and pains - until it's an advanced stage

I agree and not just kidney damage. There are concerns with increases in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes amongst others.

We won't really know the implications until years down the line. At the back of my mind I do find it peculiar that China continues to go all out to quash infections with brute force whilst we and many other western countries have given up attempting to keep infections as low as possible. I'm not for a minute suggesting China's approach should have been taken here but why are they going to those extreme lengths?

A few thoughts:

1. Because they can; most countries simply cannot take such an authoritarian approach.
2. Because changing strategy gives an implication that someone was wrong; that person would then need to be punished, that is not an incentive for changing strategy.
3. Because cities are full of very dense living environments; loss of control will lead to huge case numbers very quickly that hospitals will be unable to manage; they can cope moving teams between areas, but not if all cities had infections at once. Their vast countryside meanwhile has natural barriers to treating lots of people at once.
4. Because 3 might destabilise the country; whatever else they lose, the CCP leadership do not wish to lose power.
5. Because they can point at the rest of the world as "sharing" responsibility for letting the virus get out of control, instead of taking responsibility for it not stopping it at the start.
6. Maybe they think some other magical vaccine or treatment will save them?