Why is the ICU survival rate so low in England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Why is the ICU survival rate for Covid-19 patients so low in England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

It’s been reported as 50%, here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/28/coronavirus-intensive-care-uk-patients-50-per-cent-survival-rate

Note that this article was amended on 30 March, saying that it may not be accurate, however.

Dr. David Price at the Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York City – which currently takes in almost exclusively Covid-19 patients – reported a week ago that the majority of the ICU patients there get to go home, here:

If accurate, what does the difference reflect?

  1. The difference in socio-economics between these three countries in the UK (extensive poverty) on the one hand and NYC on the other hand?
  2. That only the most serious cases are going to the ICU over here?
  3. A higher level of specialization at that hospital in New York? (Better doctors or better practices at the hospital as it is a university hospital?)
  4. Dr. Price not having the actual numbers for his hospital?
  5. Does that hospital only treat patients from a certain segment of the population, and do they tend to be fitter and better-nourished?
  6. Something else? If so, what?

Let’s take a closer look at what the Weill Cornell Medical Center is.

Reason number 3 is my guess. Possibly in combination with reason number 5.

I looked at the insurance packages but I don’t know enough about how this works to be able to assess it.

If it’s only reason number 3 that causes the difference, then theoretically, there is room for improvement over here as the standards, theoretically, could be raised.

But we all know what’s been happening in the past 10 years of Tory reign and so there likely is no room at the moment. Or am I being too biased now?

As we just had a team of Chinese medical specialist arrive in the UK, it still looks like reason number 3 may be the main reason. That we don’t know enough and  that we can still raise our standards. That would be good news, then.


(Tweet has video.)

China also sent such teams to Italy and Iraq and maybe even more countries.

And then there is this (from 9 hours ago):

“The US has seen its cases spike dramatically in recent days and these graphs show what could be in store.”

So it’s also possible that the Weill Cornell Medical Center was still in the beginning of the developments at the time, that it had not seen the worst cases yet.

And also, while the death rates in other countries have slowed down, the death rate in the US sped up. So for some reason, the death rate may have been slower there at first.

Of course, every number has to be followed by “that we know of” because some countries do a lot more testing, which means that in some countries, many mild cases go undetected and aren’t counted, which could make their death rate look higher.

Covid-19-related deaths of people who weren’t tested likely don’t count either, so countries that are finding a lot of the deceased at home may only appear to have a lower death rate.

Note that “death rate” is not the same as “ICU survival rate”.

This was followed by this, a few hours later:


One in four deaths are occurring at home, it said, and England and Wales initially had not counted those deaths.

7 days of isolation or 14 days?

That depends on the virus load you’ve been exposed to, so on the incubation period, on how soon you’d start manifesting symptoms (or maybe also on how soon symptoms would either progress or abate if you appear to have symptoms).

So for medical professionals, who get exposed to a lot of the virus, the self-isolation period is 7 days. For people who maybe were exposed to one person with mild symptoms, it’s 14 days.

Because if the latter got infected, there would be very little of the virus in their body and it would take some time for the virus to replicate into great numbers and overwhelm the body.

Does that make sense?