Office of National Statistics: Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK: Updates

Not sure if it is the same as the UK. There were reports of people on a particular state benefit here who were not able to increase their hours without losing all the benefit. Given the problems and delays they probably had getting to start with they may have been unwilling to take a risk.

Also a hairdresser is a busy job in their feet all day. I can see why older hairdressers (as we keep increasing the age for pension) may be finding it harder to work full time.

There are a lot of female hairdressers in the UK who need to fit their job around childcare which is very expensive.

 

Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 1 April 2021 and 31 December 2022

"Main points

Monthly age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs) for deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19) have been consistently lower for all months since booster introduction in September 2021 for people who had received at least a third dose or booster at least 21 days ago, compared with unvaccinated people and those with just a first or second dose.

The ASMRs for first and second vaccine doses have been similar to those for unvaccinated people from March to December 2022; however, the confidence limits are wide for these groups because of lower populations in these vaccination statuses.

The ASMRs are not equivalent to measures of vaccine effectiveness; they account for differences in age structure and population size, but there may be other differences between the groups (particularly underlying health) that affect mortality rates.

People who have received at least a third dose or booster may have subsequently received further booster doses, however this is not recorded in our data.

Non-COVID-19 mortality rates for people who have had at least a third dose or booster at least 21 days ago have been broadly consistent and more similar to those for the unvaccinated population in the latter half of 2022 than in earlier months; in younger people, the boosters were initially targeted at people who were clinically extremely vulnerable, hence why younger people who had received boosters initially had higher non-COVID-19 mortality rates.

A high proportion of the general population has received three doses, therefore non-COVID-19 mortality rates are similar, though slightly lower, in people who have had at least a third dose or booster compared with unvaccinated people in the latter half of 2022.

Non-COVID-19 mortality rates for first and second doses are more likely to be affected by confounding factors in the latter half of 2022, as these are people who did not receive a booster when eligible and therefore may differ from the general population."

 

ONS Covid infection survey paused after 3 years, leaving no official method for tracking virus

"The [UK] government’s Covid infection survey – regarded worldwide as the “gold standard” for surveillance of the virus – is being paused for several months.

The weekly survey published by the Office for National Statistics has been the most reliable indicator for how many people in the UK are infected with coronavirus at any one time.

It will be paused for several months after ministers failed to confirm funding for the scheme beyond the end of this month."


"Since it began in April 2020, the ONS survey has been key to spotting new variants, prevalence of the virus in the community and details of Long Covid. More than 11 million swab tests and 3 million blood tests from households have been analysed."

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/o...ars-no-official-method-tracking-virus-2198861

 

That's really bad news.

 

The latest "Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK" was due March 2nd - clearly that has fallen victim to the funding cut - however employment data is a ONS staple, it doesn't reference COVID specifically but the Economic Inactivity figures include a time series for Long Term sick which mirrors changes in the pandemic:

7. Economic inactivity https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan...ploymentintheuk/march2023#economic-inactivity

"The increase in economic inactivity since the start of the coronavirus pandemic was largely among those who were students and the long-term sick (Figure 7).

The decrease in economic inactivity during the latest three-month period (November to January 2023) was largely among those inactive because they were students or retired. This was slightly offset by increases in those inactive for other reasons, while those inactive because they were long-term sick increased to a record high."

 

Prevalence of ongoing symptoms following coronavirus (COVID-19) infection in the UK: 30 March 2023

"1.Main points

• An estimated 1.9 million people living in private households in the UK (2.9% of the population) were experiencing self-reported long COVID (symptoms continuing for more than four weeks after the first confirmed or suspected coronavirus (COVID-19) infection that were not explained by something else) as of 5 March 2023 (see Figure 1).
• 
  
• Of people with self-reported long COVID, 83,000 (4%) first had (or suspected they had) COVID-19 less than 12 weeks previously, 1.7 million people (92%) at least 12 weeks previously, 1.3 million (69%) at least one year previously and 762,000 (41%) at least two years previously.
• 
  
• Of people with self-reported long COVID, 545,000 (29%) first had (or suspected they had) COVID-19 before Alpha became the main variant; this figure was 247,000 (13%) in the Alpha period, 327,000 (17%) in the Delta period and 698,000 (37%) in the Omicron period.
• 
  
• Long COVID symptoms adversely affected the day-to-day activities of 1.5 million people (79% of those with self-reported long COVID), with 381,000 (20%) reporting that their ability to undertake their day-to-day activities had been “limited a lot”.
• 
  
• Fatigue continued to be the most common symptom reported as part of individuals’ experience of long COVID (72% of those with self-reported long COVID), followed by difficulty concentrating (51%), muscle ache (49%) and shortness of breath (48%).
• 
  
• As a proportion of the UK population, the prevalence of self-reported long COVID was greatest in people aged 35 to 69 years, females, people living in more deprived areas, those working in social care, those aged 16 years and over who were not working and not looking for work, and those with another activity-limiting health condition or disability."

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...oronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/30march2023

 

They may have broken down percentages for age sub-groups, but in case I missed it, a quick calculation —

1.9m = 2.9% of the entire population (67,026,292 as of most recent data).

LC (children 2-16) is 59K
The child population (2-16) = 11,701,208
So the percentage for age 2-16 is 0.059/11.7 = 0.5%

LC (adults 17+) = 1.675m
The adult population (17+) for UK is 53,947,620
So the percentage for LC in the 17+ population is 1.68/53.95 = 3.1%

LC (adults 35-69) were the most affected group = 1.115m.
That population subgroup is 29,442,871
So the percentage for 35-69 (experienced working, family supporting) age group is 1.12/29.44 = 3.8%

(3.8% is 1 in 26)

 

Are the Fridays for Future protests started by Greta Thunberg still happening? When kids skip school on Friday. I'm wondering if that may contribute to this.

 

I saw an article blaming this on parents working from home on Fridays, suggesting that because the parent(s) were home then the kids found it easier to stay off school. However, the inverse could be true, that parent(s) arrange to be home on a Friday because their child might be struggling to get through the whole week.

 

I don't get the sense that this particular caught on in the UK, but as I don't have kids I might not be aware of how widespread it actually is.

 

I think when mild and working you often use the weekend to recover. The rise in Friday absence for school children could be reflective of that.

 

I read a worrying article about that today :

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ghost-children-the-pupils-who-never-came-back-after-lockdown/

When the lockdowns were happening I couldn't help but think at the time about how I would have coped as a child/teenager living with my family while going through the same thing. The results wouldn't have been pretty.

 

That source - and its reference (https://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/CSJ-Lost_and_Not_Found.pdf) requires close examination as frequently 'agenda pushing'. Without doing a full trawl of the numbers one obvious thing is the population bubble that is moving through school age cohorts - basically Primary age groups are falling, while Secondary age cohorts on increasing (the bubble will eventually pass through and all age groups will fall. Absenteeism is higher amongst older cohorts so as the school numbers overall age, absenteeism increases a as % of the whole.* There doesn't seem any attempt to correct for this.

That schools in England have a structural problem with absenteeism is a cause for concern - locating that problem in any specific event or cause is not easily justified - certainly neither COVID 19 nor the responses to it (lock downs) are adequate explanations for recent changes.

Edit ref:National pupil projections

 

Below is the chart from an earlier post updated with the March 30th figures. As I suggested previously the one and two year PASC numbers are continuing to rise while the the 12+ weeks are continuing to fall - at some point in the next twelve months we might expect these three lines to coincide.

Orange = 3+ months with PASC
Green = 12+ months with PASC
Grey = 24+ months with PASC

 

Done.

 

Not sure if this might not deserve its own thread as having wider relevance than just the pandemic, but this does provide context for the UK Covid 19 data:

Healthy people, prosperous lives: The first interim report of the IPPR Commission on Health and Prosperity

"The UK is getting poorer and sicker, at the same time as the country is facing a challenging economic outlook. After rapid progress on life expectancy in the 20th century, the UK has rising rates of death and impairment – including higher prevalence of long-term conditions and greater rates of multimorbidity.

Good health has its own value – but this paper tests its relationship with prosperity. Good health is vital to an enjoyable and meaningful life, free from avoidable pain, anxiety and, in the worst cases, premature death. But it is also a crucial determinant of our economic prospects, both at an individual and a national level.

This has been poorly accounted for by policymakers. In that context, this paper sets out to quantify whether better health could provide an answer to some of our most deep-rooted economic challenges and what policies could help ‘price in’ its value across all decision making."

PDF of full report: https://www.ippr.org/files/2023-04/1682577258_healthy-people-prosperous-lives-april-2023.pdf