The dangers of misunderstanding the comparison between FLU and COVID-19.
There have been significant misinterpretations of the FLU death numbers. For some this has justified a "covid is not that bad" mentality. The dangers of group-think, once again.
Covid and flu can both cause viral pneumonia. Both can lead to secondary bacterial pneumonia.
But the direct death rate of each is:
Flu = 4/day
Bacterial Pneumonia = 55/day
Covid = 125/day (at CURRENT rates!)
ONS:
Most of us experience FLU as an unpleasant but rarely serious illness. This remains true for those of us working in acute medicine - we rarely see a flu pneumonia.
We do see a lot of bacterial pneumonia and now Covid pneumonia.
Where does the confusion or mis-information come from?
Sometimes its just that flu and (bacterial) pneumonia are lumped together: "20k deaths from flu and pneumonia".
Actually less than 10% are caused by FLU, the vast majority are caused by bacteria (like strep).
You may also have heard some stating flu kills between 4,000 to 20,000 people a year in the UK. These numbers come from modelling studies and are projections for a possible contributory role of Flu in other deaths, mainly bacterial pneumonia.
The hypothesis is that while flu causes only a small number of deaths, it can weaken the body and can increase the chance of death from other things...mainly bacterial pneumonia.
While this may be so (more evidence is needed), the deaths referred to are by bacterial pneumonia.
So, the modelling effectively TAKES deaths from the bacterial pneumonia column and puts them in the Flu column. The argument: take flu more seriously!
You can't of course use the same modelling to argue Covid is not that serious.
The issue is perception. We perceive flu to be relatively benign. So, if we say Covid is currently killing three times that of flu, it may not sound that bad - very few people know someone who has died of flu.
But these higher numbers quoted refer to bacterial pneumonia.
Comparisons with bacterial pneumonia cause no such perception problems. We know the number of deaths, we know the burden on health services it causes, and there is no need to use modelling or projections.
➡️On a population level, pneumonia is bad, but Covid is much worse.
At the current rates of Covid, it is TRIPLING the total number of deaths from community acquired pneumonia (includes flu and bacterial). It is likely TRIPLING the healthcare BURDEN from pneumonia both acutely and in the longer term.
The public health impact of COVID is massive!
I need to tell you where the trap is in relation to the NHS
Both Streeting & Starmer have committed to keeping the NHS “free at the point of use”…
But that can look like many different things
🧵
1/x
For example, currently you can see your GP, get referred for a colonoscopy, be seen in a private hospital, and not be charged a penny. Technically, free at the point of care, even though it has cost us all more money to deliver that care.
So, Starmer and Streeting could expand this…allowing even more “NHS patients” to use the private sector but paid for with public money, with money taken directly from the NHS budget in fact.
Big news is that access to GPs in the U.K. was one of the best
Yes, you read that right…
“This places the UK among the better-performing nations with respect to same- or next-day appointments, with only the Netherlands (50%) and Germany (49%) significantly higher.”
This access may be coming at a cost though!
The UK scored poorly on “time spent” with appointments
No surprise given most countries run at 15-20 minute appointments versus the UKs 10 mins.
In 2013 85% of people felt the GP spent enough time. It’s now 58%
Given some so called patriots want a French healthcare system, let’s take a look at it.
🧵
Summary: social insurance with 95% of people taking private healthcare to cover copays. Costs £40bn per year more. Less equitable than NHS, but can turn a profit
1/10
Akin to some other European countries, France uses a social insurance based model predominantly - where employer and employee pay a means-tested insurance premium
but unlike most EU countries the French people pay a surcharge on pretty much everything they access or use
This has led to 95% of the population taking out private insurance.
This is an insurance premium (on top of the social insurance premium) that is in part based on likelihood of needing health care - older people paying more.
Some good policies but overall disappointing and a bit concerning.
A summary thread
1/x
1. There is the title: Build an NHS Fit for the Future
In one way, fair enough. Buildings are outdated and crumbling and IT is hopeless
But, Labour seems oblivious to the fact the NHS leads the world in medical and surgical care. The issue is merely access not tech upgrades.
2. "publicly owned and funded" is meaningless. Even the deranged health system of the U.S. has a publicly funded component - waiting lists are horrendous and access to treatment is very limited.
We want universal access to all available treatments - quite different!