Why we are still in deep trouble

Davidhs Do you have any links to sources about the virus mutating significantly and being unpredictable? Everything I've read has suggested the opposite ie that it has mutated, but not that much, and it's behaving very predictably - but I realise that there is ongoing research.

There are many factors which contribute to our high death toll.

I was shocked to read that if a person has a positive covid test, recovers but then months later dies of something else, that death is still added to the virus total. Isn’t that madness? Other countries apparently don’t do that.

We also have a high number of ethnic groups susceptible to the virus here, and of course there’s the fact that we are the second fattest nation in Europe.

Lots of people maintain that our lockdown should have come sooner but the government was concerned that if it was introduced too soon, we would be fed up and start going out and mixing just at the peak.

The timing was critical, but in the event the government was quoted as saying they were astonished at the level of compliance.

I disagree with you absolutely Urmstongran. It's not either/or. The sombrero analogy was just childish. It would be possible to bring the case rate down much lower, but the government needs to be prepared to upset people in the short term - supporting them in necessary. That would include targeting financial support and accommodation for those who can't self-isolate.

Davidhs I agree with you about schools. I just don't see how schools can return to anything like normality in September without a huge spike in transmission. I've seen the plans some of the schools have made (via my online students) and I know that parents don't have much confidence that they can be made to work. The logistics are just impossible.

No JenniferEccles it's not madness. Approximately 40% of those who are hospitalised with Covid-19 carry on having serious symptoms for months, possibly for life. Reports were published yesterday about the serious effects on the heart, which sometimes don't become evident for a few weeks. Germany offers echocardiograms to people who have been hospitalised.

It's also highly unlikely that somebody would die from something completely unrelated within weeks of having a serious Covid-19 infection. Obviously, it will become an issue in the future, but at the moment it's just being used as an excuse.

Other countries also have high numbers of "ethnic groups". Germany and France both have a higher percentage than the UK.

If ethnicity is such an issue, how come Trafford, which is predominantly white British, has one of the highest infection rates in Greater Manchester?

Ethnicity and obesity don't make people more susceptible to infection. Lack of effective social distancing does, as well as an inadequate test, trace and isolate system.

There's no chance of normality for the economy or anything else until we have control. As a country we have expertise, financial and physical resources that need to be harnessed to ensure the best possible outcome. At the moment autumn is likely to result in a surge of new cases and all the effects that is likely to have. National lockdown is not impossible, we must strive to make the most of this respite.

I’m inclined to agree with you Urmstongran. It’s not like the film ‘ Contagion’, where everyone who caught it died, horrifically, any age. Lemongrove gave us the two options. Originally, it was about protecting the NHS. I think the government have done really well. I’m not normally a Conservative voter, but I can’t see anyone else doing any better. We pray every morning for a young mother we heard about on the news, who is now battling against a cancer which has gone further than it would have done in normal times. She said she didn’t want to go to the doctor, and put it off. I’m sure she’s not the only one. We have to be sensible and do what hopefully saves the majority. We are all going to die, and I feel we live in a society now, where this just isn’t accepted, and is fought against at all cost.

The one that irritates me is people who say when someone dies of Covid “oh they had underlying conditions “ as if that makes it alright , totally disregarding the fact that said person may well have lived for years and years with that underlying condition.

The point about underlying conditions is that it increases the risk of death from Covid. Those conditions are not being dismissed. They are mentioned because it is relevant to the nature of the virus and to how it might be handled.

Covid19 is characterised by a slow rate of mutation, so lockdowns and quarantines are a good way to go.

Getting on top of the virus is the first step to get the economy back on its feet.

DiscoDancer Yes, we are all going to die and if you wish to take your chances, that's up to you. Personally, and as somebody "with underlying health conditions", I'm not that keen on dying just yet. Local infection rates have been creeping up for weeks and it's not inconceivable that deaths could be in 6 figures in the UK, if we just let it runs its course. No, thank you!

Luckygirl

The point about underlying conditions is that it increases the risk of death from Covid. Those conditions are not being dismissed. They are mentioned because it is relevant to the nature of the virus and to how it might be handled.

Covid19 is characterised by a slow rate of mutation, so lockdowns and quarantines are a good way to go.

Getting on top of the virus is the first step to get the economy back on its feet.

Yes! I couldn't agree with you more!

Getting on top of the virus is the first step to get the economy back on its feet.

growstuff

No JenniferEccles it's not madness. Approximately 40% of those who are hospitalised with Covid-19 carry on having serious symptoms for months, possibly for life. Reports were published yesterday about the serious effects on the heart, which sometimes don't become evident for a few weeks. Germany offers echocardiograms to people who have been hospitalised.

It's also highly unlikely that somebody would die from something completely unrelated within weeks of having a serious Covid-19 infection. Obviously, it will become an issue in the future, but at the moment it's just being used as an excuse.

But Scotland and Wales do not count COVID19 deaths like that according to the news last night.
Apparently they count anyone who had been diagnosed with the virus within the previous 28 days and subsequently died as having died from the disease.

I don't think we can stay locked down for months but we do need to proceed with caution.
Prohibiting large gatherings such as those which have happened should be essential.

There is a spike in Vuctoria and the Victorian Premier tried to blame it on people arriving in the State. However, I have heard that anyone arriving was made to quarantine for 14 days in hotels with guards to make sure they did so.

The Premier then encouraged everyone out on the streets for a protest and many MPs also attended. People were not distancing or wearing masks.
There was then a spike which the Premier tried to blame on people in high rise flats and then care homes.

I wouldn't want to be making the decisions but surely some decisions are obvious?

Whichever way it's counted the excess death toll is 65000. The NHS was protected because so many died at home/care settings. I don't think that it's any sort of achievement.

Who said it was?

I agree with you. There does need to be consistency. This point was raised in one of the Independent Sage meetings. However, it's unlikely in practice to have made a significant difference to the number of deaths so far.

Even somebody who caught Covid-19 in March could still die from it. We know that the most dangerous time starts a couple of weeks after initial infection. We also know that the effects are long-lasting. For the statistics to make much difference, it would have to be people who were infected in March and then died of something completely unrelated between 1-4 months later, which isn't very likely.

Callistemon

I don't think we can stay locked down for months but we do need to proceed with caution.
Prohibiting large gatherings such as those which have happened should be essential.

There is a spike in Vuctoria and the Victorian Premier tried to blame it on people arriving in the State. However, I have heard that anyone arriving was made to quarantine for 14 days in hotels with guards to make sure they did so.

The Premier then encouraged everyone out on the streets for a protest and many MPs also attended. People were not distancing or wearing masks.
There was then a spike which the Premier tried to blame on people in high rise flats and then care homes.

I wouldn't want to be making the decisions but surely some decisions are obvious?

We also need to be extra vigilant when schools reopen. It's accepted that the R rate will inevitably increase, but we're already on an upward trajectory.

My local secondary school has over 2000 pupils and about 200 adults in the building. The chances that one of them will be infected in any week is incredibly high. Even with systems in place to reduce contact within the school, it's going to be impossible to stop transmission. Local systems need to be in place to test, get back results and close the school down within hours, if the whole town isn't going to be infected.

To be honest, I agree with all you, everyone has made valid points. The only thing I take issue with is that the virus is mutating, as growstuff says, everything I have read indicates that if the virus is mutating, it is mutating very slowly, and has not changed significantly since the beginning of all this. Which should give us hope for a vaccine.
I think everyone has to assess their own level of risk and vulnerability and go forward from there. I found the total lockdown, not that it ever was really a total lockdown, but I found it depressing and my mental health was definitely affected, in particular because I have had a gum infection which has been treated with antibiotics for two solid months, with apparently no end in sight. The Dental Hub didn’t see me as urgent. Anyway, long story short, I’m going private and having the surgery on Thursdays. My relief is huge. The government have put the economy before citizens and this has been catastrophic for some people. The lockdown was only brought in to protect the NHS, which of course we all agree with, but to leave others such as dental patients, cancer sufferers etc without treatment is simply not good enough. I particularly agree with Luckygirl about the policy of not closing borders. Some countries have still got closed borders. Canada is an example. We were supposed to visit Canada this autumn for the colours, the flights are booked, but we won’t be going this year anyway. Why were our borders not closed? That was the most foolish decision, and in my opinion, it caused many more cases and deaths than we would have had otherwise.

Exactly Callistemon
That was my point. Regardless of whether someone has serious after effects of the virus, the fact that countries record death totals differently is exactly why it’s meaningless to try to compare different countries.

In any case ALL confirmed virus cases are counted here, even those where people had it mildly and fully recovered.

I agree with Lemongrove

JenniferEccles

Exactly Callistemon
That was my point. Regardless of whether someone has serious after effects of the virus, the fact that countries record death totals differently is exactly why it’s meaningless to try to compare different countries.

In any case ALL confirmed virus cases are counted here, even those where people had it mildly and fully recovered.

It's accepted that the methods vary between countries. However, this example produces minimal differences. The fact is that the UK has one of the highest excess death rates and many deaths were/still are avoidable. Denying that is sticking your head in the sand.

Agree that deaths have been counted differently but thee excess death rate is factual, difficult to argue with and as a country we still fared badly compared against other European countries.

BTW For herd immunity to be achieved, at least 60% of the population would need to be immune (preferably 80%).

Leaving aside the suspicion that being infected doesn't give long-term immunity, that means that 39,600,000 people would need to be infected. If the death rate is 0.5% (and nobody is absolutely sure) that means that 198,000 people would die and many others would be left with life-long side effects.

Is that what people really want?

No growstuff, I don’t want that and I’m sure others don’t either.

maddyone

No growstuff, I don’t want that and I’m sure others don’t either.

Which is why squabbling about counting methods, dithering, obfuscation and inefficiency isn't acceptable. I'm fed up of the lying and excuses.