Sky are reporting 91% of people that have died in the UK had at least 1 pre existing medical condition.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread
- Thread starter GingerBeerMan
- Start date
This figure worries me.
What exactly counts as a pre existing condition ?
Does it have to have been diagnosed prior to death, or is it discovered afterwards ?
Do incredibly mild conditions count ? Would small lung damage caused by previous smoking count ?
I guess the real question is how big is the 'pre existing' net ?
That clarifies things somewhat, but I still have a question.
Did the people with the pre existing conditions know they had them ?
To take one example. Was the heart disease known by the person with it, or was it discovered after death ?
I don't think many of the recorded deaths will have had post-mortems, so would assume they all knew about pre-existing conditions.
Daily report from Sweden... 130 new deaths spread over the last couple of days. We're getting less and less ICU patients, the peak seems to have been a week ago though too early to say definitely.
State epidemiologist got a question about our high level of deaths per million inhabitants and said that we count care home deaths, which countries like "UK and Spain mostly dont".
As they've said plenty of times the virus is very likely to dip a lot as it becomes warmer and this indeed seems to be the case.
Should probably count ourselves lucky this virus came in the early spring and not in October or something, because that would likely have been... bad. And the expected second wave could be a disaster compared to this, but at least we have the time to prepare now.
I was screaming for lockdown a few weeks ago and I am now very happy that the government didnt listen.
State epidemiologist got a question about our high level of deaths per million inhabitants and said that we count care home deaths, which countries like "UK and Spain mostly dont".
As they've said plenty of times the virus is very likely to dip a lot as it becomes warmer and this indeed seems to be the case.
Should probably count ourselves lucky this virus came in the early spring and not in October or something, because that would likely have been... bad. And the expected second wave could be a disaster compared to this, but at least we have the time to prepare now.
I was screaming for lockdown a few weeks ago and I am now very happy that the government didnt listen.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
How many people who suffer from a heart attack or cardiac arrest knew they had a heart problem beforehand or even had one? It can't be all.
Underlying health conditions also include quite manageable things where people lead pretty normal lives otherwise - diabetes, obesity, asthma, smoking etc.
Personally I can think of some pretty fit people in their 70's, who'd knock the socks, health wise, off some junk food eating, overweight smoker in their 20s for example.
As a slightly overweight 30 year old chainsmoker I can confirm about half of the 70 year olds out there would able to strangle me with their bare hands and outrun me if I tried to escape.
The Wizard
Well-known member
- Jul 2, 2009
- 18,401
80 deaths in Scotland, 32 in Wales, 18 Northern Ireland, 740 England. 870 total U.K. deaths. Seems as though we are at the peak/plateau,
Whilst this is true, the immune system declines with age regardless of other factors. Being 'fit' doesn't mean you have the immune system of a 20 year old (though it's obviously better than being obese.
This graph of deaths by actual date of death (rather than when it is registered) looks much more encouraging - assuming it is correct.
from @northamrd
Edit: If you download the summary spreadsheet here the data is clear: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
We are WELL PAST the peak already. This really should be reported.
from @northamrd
Edit: If you download the summary spreadsheet here the data is clear: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
We are WELL PAST the peak already. This really should be reported.
Last edited:
The Wizard
Well-known member
- Jul 2, 2009
- 18,401
Double post
The Wizard
Well-known member
- Jul 2, 2009
- 18,401
18k tests, 4.6k new cases. New cases also at a plateau
Re: the chart above, I’m pretty sure more deaths will be added from the past few days at a later date so I’m not sure how reliable that is.
Re: the chart above, I’m pretty sure more deaths will be added from the past few days at a later date so I’m not sure how reliable that is.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
Yeah, was about to post the same. It is probably useful if one ignores the last 7 (?) days, although that doesn't look as encouraging.
If you look at the raw data that is clearly stated.
Just looking at the data from today, 90% of the deaths reported occurred in the last five days. So in reality will end up with a graph like the red line below.
This graph of deaths by actual date of death (rather than when it is registered) looks much more encouraging - assuming it is correct.
from @northamrd
Edit: If you download the summary spreadsheet here the data is clear: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
We are WELL PAST the peak already. This really should be reported.
That assumes that there are no more unreported deaths that have already happened which is very unlikely.
Quite a few 70+ marathon and ultrarunners that easily kick the arses of much younger runners...............
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,778
I think the most accurate 'date of death' data is released by the ONS about 11 days in arrears. (I think it was published up to 3rd April on Tuesday). Along with others, I suspect the dip in the last few days on that graph isn't actually accurate
I think the most accurate 'date of death' data is released by the ONS about 11 days in arrears. (I think it was published up to 3rd April on Tuesday). Along with others, I suspect the dip in the last few days on that graph isn't actually accurate
It's ENTIRELY accurate, but only relates to hospital deaths. I would, however, expect a graph of all deaths to follow a similar pattern.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,778
What I mean is that I believe 161 (the number for yesterday, 15th April) will go up significantly as deaths from yesterday get fed through the system. I think there is a delay in getting the deaths per day figure.
This is the graph from the data released Tuesday 14th April by the ONS.
It shows the difference between what deaths had been registered by date by 3rd April (yellow), what the Government had announced the deaths to be by the 3rd April (light blue) and what (dark blue and only known 7 days later on 11th April) was released by the ONS as the most accurate date of death data known. There is a delay of about 7 days to get a truly accurate picture of death by date.
A significant number of the deaths that occurred on 3rd April weren't registered by 3rd April, but during the following 7 days (the difference between yellow and dark blue).
(And all these figures are hospital deaths only).
Last edited: