5 ms·

Ok, but the UK has a large, integrated, health care system, with an office of national statistics that is following the disease and published this data. It als

Ok, but the UK has a large, integrated, health care system, with an office of national statistics that is following the disease and published this data. It also talks about how poorer people, and those from non-white backgrounds are disproportionately likely to have worse outcomes. Just because you don't see it happening in your circles, doesn't mean it's not happening in other ones. The authors write in the BMJ: “The increase in risk was not confined to the elderly and was not uniform across ethnicities."

timr 6y ago
> Ok, but the UK has a large, integrated, health care system, with an office of national statistics that is following the disease and published this data. Having an office of national statistics does not mean that this particular paper is being reported correctly by the mass media, it doesn't mean that the paper itself supports the discussion of "long covid" amongst otherwise healthy people, and it certainly doesn't mean that other people on this thread reporting personal stories are representative of the actual risk. That last bit is what I'm emphasizing here. Literally any scary anecdote is amplified, and the (many more) pedestrian anecdotes go undiscussed. As other comments on this page have noted, there are a number of legitimate criticisms of this paper that should be considered carefully, and even if you don't agree with those, the paper is self-admittedly discussing a predominantly elderly, sick population who were hospitalized for the virus. It doesn't generalize to discussion of anecdotes of "long covid" from much healthier people. > It also talks about how poorer people, and those from non-white backgrounds are disproportionately likely to have worse outcomes. Just because you don't see it happening in your circles, doesn't mean it's not happening in other ones. You're making assumptions.
- mattmanser 6y ago
  You can go read their report yourself if you want and see that what you've claimed is factually incorrect. Plus, all the data is there, in CSV or XLS format if you want to check their maths: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/prevalenceofongoingsymptomsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/1april2021 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... To me, they seem to be trying to make it as accessible and clear as possible with most news articles taking the salient points directly from the ONS's own summary. As you can see from figure 2, their data is not focused on old people as you erroneously claim, it does seem to show that more deprived = more symptoms, and that non-white are more likely to have symptoms.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

timr 6y ago

> Ok, but the UK has a large, integrated, health care system, with an office of national statistics that is following the disease and published this data. Having an office of national statistics does not mean that this particular paper is being reported correctly by the mass media, it doesn't mean that the paper itself supports the discussion of "long covid" amongst otherwise healthy people, and it certainly doesn't mean that other people on this thread reporting personal stories are representative of the actual risk. That last bit is what I'm emphasizing here. Literally any scary anecdote is amplified, and the (many more) pedestrian anecdotes go undiscussed. As other comments on this page have noted, there are a number of legitimate criticisms of this paper that should be considered carefully, and even if you don't agree with those, the paper is self-admittedly discussing a predominantly elderly, sick population who were hospitalized for the virus. It doesn't generalize to discussion of anecdotes of "long covid" from much healthier people. > It also talks about how poorer people, and those from non-white backgrounds are disproportionately likely to have worse outcomes. Just because you don't see it happening in your circles, doesn't mean it's not happening in other ones. You're making assumptions.

mattmanser 6y ago
You can go read their report yourself if you want and see that what you've claimed is factually incorrect. Plus, all the data is there, in CSV or XLS format if you want to check their maths: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/prevalenceofongoingsymptomsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/1april2021 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... To me, they seem to be trying to make it as accessible and clear as possible with most news articles taking the salient points directly from the ONS's own summary. As you can see from figure 2, their data is not focused on old people as you erroneously claim, it does seem to show that more deprived = more symptoms, and that non-white are more likely to have symptoms.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]