COVID-19: WHAT WOULD I DO IF I WAS 25? OR A STUDENT?

Maybe not though

My offspring are in their 20s.  I remember that's a great time of life.  Indeed 25 is the finest age (* see footnote).

Governments here in the UK and around Europe are finding it's the younger adults under 50, but especially in their 20s, who are becoming a larger proportion of those testing positive for COVID-19.

That's with the daily infection total rising, so the number of younger adults catching the disease is rising rapidly in England:

This mirrors what is happening elsewhere in Europe  Does this matter?  Very few younger adults will die.

Some commentators suggest we shouldn't be concerned until hospitalisation numbers rise.  But that would be too late to take action.  The time lag from infection to hospitalisation is typically weeks, being a week before symptoms appear (2-14 days) and then some time before the illness gets bad enough to go to hospital.

Apart from death, there are also five other types of serious risk that affect people who catch COVID-19 and never get to hospital, which also need to be considered.

So let's explore what COVID-19 means to someone aged 25 from their perspective. 


ATTITUDES

Only from a distance

If I was 25, there are three key attitudes that would affect my behaviour as a result of COVID-19:

• The risks to myself
• My attitude towards giving the infection to other family, friends and strangers, especially my elders and those who are at extra risk
• How my attitude would change as infection levels changed

I might be the type who throws caution to the wind, taking part in dangerous sports and ignoring warnings on the sides of tobacco packets.  "It won't happen to me" is an attitude that has arguably been very positive in mankind's development.

At the other end of the spectrum, I might be someone who loses sleep over climate change, as I read today.  In that case I would wear a cycle helmet when cycling (it always surprises me how many people don't) and do nothing that would be regarded as risky. 

In the middle is a mass of younger adults rather like me who would do some risky things, but avoid others.  Plus those who understand the risks of the more dangerous activities, and take sensible precautions.

Would I give a damn about others?  Again there is a wide spectrum.  Watching smokers, some couldn't care whether others get smoked, whilst others make sure nobody else is affected.

Many younger people wouldn't do something that emperils their parents and grandparents, but wouldn't necessarily care about strangers.

Then of course my attitude to the level of infections would change as the risk profile changed.  The higher the level of infections, the higher the risks.

Let's explore these matters in greater detail.


THE RISKS TO MYSELF

Before hospitalisation, and often without hospitalisation, there are five distinct risks of catching COVID-19 that are far worse than catching 'flu.

These are risks other than death, which is the sixth.


These five are:

• Long, unpleasant initial infection, often more than two or three weeks
• Risk of strokes that can kill or leave serious damage
• Illness for more than a month
• Plus the risk of feeling lethargic for many months
• The risk of long-term or permanent damage to organs throughout the body, including:
• Heart
• Liver
• Kidneys
• Digestive system
• Lungs
• Brain

It's difficult to establish how these issues affect people in their 20s, as distinct from the general population, and more detailed statistics are sorely needed.  But there's enough stories about younger folk to know this could be a real problem for me. 

Indeed Devi Sridhar, an advisor to the Scottish government and a member of the Independent SAGE group warns at 30min30 that this virus is “too dangerous to spread through the population, not only because of the mortality [dying] but because of the morbidity [LongCOVID] it causes in young adults…that’s going to be the story about COVID, not about the deaths”.  Chilling stuff.

Personally, any one of these risks wold get me taking precautions.  I don't want to incur heart damage, let alone a stroke.  Nor do I want to be lethargic for months, perhaps unable to work and earn my keep.

Not withdrawing from life, but following the guidance of social distance, masks and hand hygiene.  I really wouldn't want to catch this hideous disease. 

What if I'm not interested in all this 'tosh', and just want to get on with life as normal?   The expression 'covidiots' is harsh, as it's a matter of education.  This has been sorely lacking.  The Government keeps talking about deaths, and not about the survivors.  'Common sense' is baesd on experience, and none of us have experienced such a virus before.

The COVID Symptoms Study run by King's College London using the ZOE app has reported that one in ten people have initial symptoms for at least three weeks.  This is across all age groups.  Professor Tim Spector, who runs the study, reported on BBC Radio 4 a couple of days ago that:

• Some 300,000 people have reported symptoms lasting more than a month
• Some 60,000 over three months

Not now, Josephine

There will always be some people who ignore precautions.  But the Government must step up its campaign to educate the public on all the risks, especially as affect younger adults.

Younger people will naturally get amorous.  Here's some specific notes "For the Love in Your Life"





ATTITUDE TO OTHERS CATCHING COVID-19 FROM ME

"Don't kill gran"

If someone tells me that I could kill someone by passing my infection on to others, either directly or indirectly, I would take notice.  I would hope others would too.

That's certainly the message given by Health Secretary Matt Hancock  whne he said to young people recently "Don't kill your gran by catching coronavirus and then passing it on. And you can pass it on before you have had any symptoms at all"

It's basically the same stance that Oxfordshire's director of public health, Ansaf Azhar took three weeks ago, in trying to get younger people to change their behaviour "The message to younger people is that you may not experience the worst of the symptoms yourself, but you may pass it on to loved ones in older age groups or those with underlying health conditions who do."

But there's the problem.  There seems to be an official disregard for LongCOVID, so younger people aren't being warned of the five sets of risks above.  Yet those risks are very real.


IF THE LEVEL OF INFECTION CHANGES

The level of new infections impacts the number of people who would be out and about infectious.  This is because people are infectious before they show symptoms, and not all who should self-isolate do so.

The estimate is that 3.5 times the number of official "new confirmed cases" in a week will be infectious, mainly due to deficiencies in testing everybody well.

So in a city such as Oxford with around 150,000 people, a rate of 40 new infections a week per hundred thousand means around 210 people I might bump into infectious.  (40*3.5*150000/100000). That's a pretty high chance, especially if I go into inherently higher risk situations such as an indoor restaurant.

Indeed my simple rule is "Outdoors not indoors" as the risk outdoors is far lower. That would be my rule even aged 25.  Getting a haircut safely has been a challenge.

Get the rate down below a real 2 a day per hundred thousand, 14 a week, and  there would be only some 21 people infectious out and about in Oxford.  I could be far more relaxed.  That means getting the official rate at current testing level down to 4 per week per hundred thousand, if we divide 14 by 3.5.

That is a key part of the #NearZero proposal.


STUDENTS

In a typical student house

I feel especially sorry for students returning to university.  Not least the freshers missing out on all the normal activities as they settle into life away from home.

COVID-19 spreads most easily in households, as soon as one person comes home infectious. Student houses, flats and halls of residence with shared faciltiies are prime places for COVID-19 to run riot.

In other parts of the world universities are having to be effectively shut.  For example, "All Michigan State [university] students asked to quarantine due to 'exponential growth' of COVID-19".

Update 29/9/20: Student lockdowns are now in place in English universities, such as at Manchester Metropolitan.

That's not a cloud students should have to live under, nor the university management.  #NearZero adopted earlier in the year would have avoided such a problem, provided students from abroad were handled appropriately.  An opportunity missed.



IN CONCLUSION

If I was 25 or a student:

• If I knew about the risks that can affect younger people who contract COVID-19, I would take all reasonable precautions to avoid catching the disease. Most others would too, I would hope
• I would certainly be careful about mixing with older members of the family, and older people generally
• I would be far more relaxed if infection rates were very low, with a #NearZero policy in place

That means three actions for the Governments in the UK, and indeed other governments elsewhere:

• Drastically improve the communication of risks to the public, and to younger adults in particular
• Adopt a #NearZero strategy
• Take actions as soon as possible to get to #NearZero and realise the beneifts to lives, livelihoods and the economy

FOOTNOTE

*  25 is the finest age because:

• You can finally do everything that an adult is allowed to do, except formally retire.  The last thing is being able to hire a car anywhere in the world if you have a driving licence
• Still eligible for some youth benefits, such as the 16-25 Railcard in the UK
• As well as being still youthful, often without the shackles of later life

To live life again, let's go #NearZero