Disgruntledgoat
Player Valuation: £50m
Sturgeon, today lol
![]()
Shes lucky. You should see the mess our lass made of mine yesterday.
Sturgeon, today lol
![]()
We moved down to Cornwall last October and we registered with new medical centre straight away because my missus has numerous medical issues, They wrote to ask if wanted a consultation as it could be 6 months before my medical records came through. 6 months!!You're kind of assuming there's been some sort of joined up thinking implemented in terms of electronic patient records across all NHS trusts, which, when they tried to put together an integrated system however many years ago it was, failed miserably and very publicly.
It's not directly relevant to the stats we're talking about here, but it illustrates a point
Last year, I got referred by my GP to a hospital. My GP writes a letter, which goes to an appointments department. They don't actually send you an appointment, but I'm then contacted to see which hospital I want to go to, and there was a choice of six.
They had figures for waiting times for two of them, but I had to ring the other four myself to find out their waiting times because they're not on an integrated system. I then get an appointment to see a consultant. The consultant agrees with my GP's diagnosis, and refers to me a specialist dept in the same hospital. But that referral isn't done in an electronic system, she types a letter up and sends it on to the specialists dept.
Point of all that is to illustrate how poor data collection and systems are in the NHS. They're about 30 years out of date, and that's inherent throughout the organisation, and is something governments of all shades have failed miserably to address. It should be no surprise to anyone that's had any dealings with the NHS to learn that, as far as data goes, they're absolutely hopeless. It would be very easy to blame Johnson, Hancock et al for that, but the problems lie far deeper than the elected knobs at the top.
I thought there was a report done Wednesday/Thursday that said BAME were badly affected by this virus, these figures dont bear this out?
Richard Warry
BBC News
An analysis of 3,883 Covid-19 patients admitted to 229 critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland up to Thursday has been published by the Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre.
Of these patients, 871 have died, 818 have been discharged, and 2,194 were last reported as still receiving critical care.
The average age of the patients was 59.8 years. Some 72.5% were male, and 27.5% female. Some 66.4% were white, 14.4% Asian, 11.9% black, and 1.3% of mixed race.
- Nearly three-quarters of the patients had a body mass index higher than the recommended healthy level of 18.5 to 25. Some 35% had a BMI of 25 to 30 - the overweight range. And 38.5% had a BMI over more than 30 - putting them in the obese range.
- 93.2% had previously been able to live without assistance in daily activities. Only 6.7% previously needed some assistance, and just three needed total assistance.
- Focusing on the 1,053 patients who needed advanced respiratory support, the average age on admission was 61.9 years. 73% were male, 27% female. Out of this group, 66.3% died, and 33.7% are alive.
- Examining the final outcome for patients admitted to critical care, for the 133 aged 16-39, 76.7% were discharged alive, and 23.3% died. For the 484 aged 60-69, 43.6% were discharged alive, and 56.4% died. For the 434 aged 70-79, 31.3% were discharged alive, and 68.7% died. And for the 107 aged over 80, 27.1% were discharged alive, and 72.9% died.
How does that work? Presumably the 'daily death count' for yesterday will also have had deaths that occurred from the 1-9 April if that's how it works?
Thanks fella, that's helpful.at the last census the ethnic makeup of the UK was:
80 per cent of the population were white British
6.8% Asian (Pakistani, Indian, Bangladeshi, other) ‘groups’
Black groups 3.4 per cent;
Chinese groups 0.7 cent,
Arab groups 0.4 per cent
other groups 0.6 per cent.
so the Asian and Black numbers seem quite a bit more than what you'd expect, though obviously this has hit the city with the biggest Black and Asian communities in the country first so that might have skewed it a bit
(info from here)
It included some from March IIRC. (Actually, that may have been Monday or Tuesday's - can't remember now).
Also a fair bit of research had been done into BAME health which may attribute the disproportionate ratesThanks fella, that's helpful.
The evidence is stacking up to support age health issue and ethnicity . I know why it's been peddled further to anyone, this needed to be done to save lives from selfish twerps.
- Nearly three-quarters of the patients had a body mass index higher than the recommended healthy level of 18.5 to 25. Some 35% had a BMI of 25 to 30 - the overweight range. And 38.5% had a BMI over more than 30 - putting them in the obese range.
Do they? I have my doubts.Not been great have they.
Thank the lord that the actual people doing stuff know what they are doing.
I can't know for sure, but I feel this is a misnomer when discussing the virus, as I think the average BMI in this country is 27.5.
So surely all that's happening is the hospital intake for coronavirus is simply representing approximately the national average rather than it being a reliable morbidity indicator for the virus?
Fat people have more health issues is hardly a stretch.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.