Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

SpookyFrank said:
Without in any way defending government bullshit, the UK constituent nations do have different demographics, population densities, healthcare capacities and distribution of covid cases. Allowing different regional responses makes a lot of sense; provided you've got the public on board via consistent, open communication and competent, effective and humane actions to contain the virus.
Click to expand...
True enough, but AFAIK the 4 governments are informed by separate groups of scientists? So it may just be down to differing perspectives on a similar problem?
 
teuchter said:
I'm quite surprised that the 'south east' numbers are so low because I'd have thought there would be a significant portion of that population commuting into london on crowded trains, working in office buildings etc. But maybe that is actually a small portion of the overall population.
Click to expand...
At the time they were tested I doubt many of them were commuting to London or sitting in offices...home working was the thing, especially with the more highly paid jobs which are done by those who take long train journeys every day. The lower paid people live closer to work.
 
I expect as part of the testing program they are gathering geographic information, it would be interesting to see where in the UK the new cases are occurring.
 
Let's have a look at the case for ending social distancing for the non-vulnerable. The infection rate is only 7% in England. There's other data to suggest the virus is getting less infectious. We've already killed off many of our over 70s by not protecting care homes. If we can provide enough PPE for hospital staff and carers, and protect people in care homes and vulnerable people in their own homes, ending social distancing outside those places would lead to a certain number of deaths. But pubs, coffee shops, restaurants and tourist venues could reopen. Lots of other businesses too. If not there will be masses more unemployment, partly because the furlough money is running out. (I think it's projected to cost £90bn within the next few months.) More mental health problems, suicides, less money for social services, education, benefits and the |NHS, more and more poverty, huuuge numbers of early deaths because of delays to cancer detection and treatment. My gut feel is that the years of life lost by ending social distancing will be a much smaller number than years lost by a longer recession. We need a sensible courageous government to look at this choice. I think Johnson is weak and drifting and may collapse physically. Then I think the 1922 committee would just appoint Gove as PM.
 
Interesting article in Inside Housing exploring the links between Coronavirus deaths and poor housing

Insight - The housing pandemic: four graphs showing the link between COVID-19 deaths and the housing crisis - Inside Housing (paywalled so archived).

Here is one of the graphs in it :

KyLBQ5w.png


Graph one shows the age-related COVID-19 mortality rates in each council area across England and Wales plotted against levels of housing overcrowding. Mortality rates (deaths involving coronavirus per 100,000 people) are taken from the ONS’ data and capture the period between 1 March and 17 April. Overcrowding data is based on 2014 analysis by the ONS on data gathered through the 2011 census. (...) An overcrowded home is defined as one with one or more fewer bedrooms than required by the household according to the government’s bedroom standard. Here, levels of overcrowded homes are presented as a percentage of all homes in the area.
Click to expand...

As graph one (above) shows, the correlation is stark. It strongly indicates that areas with more overcrowded housing have been worst hit by coronavirus.
Click to expand...

Out in the top right corner – with the highest COVID-19 death rate (144.3 deaths per 100,00) and the biggest housing overcrowding problem (25.2% of homes are overcrowded) – is Newham in east London. (...) There is a distinct London focus to the overcrowding problem. Of the 30 areas with the highest percentages of households living in overcrowded conditions, 26 are in London. Part of that can likely be explained by the acute affordable housing shortages in the city.
Click to expand...


The article also looks at death rates in relation to the proportion of Houses in Multiple Occupation, the level of social housing shortage and the proportion of homeless households in temporary accommodation. The latter is also interesting

6qzMZZb.png


The chart above shows the same COVID-19 mortality rates data used in the two previous graphs, broken down by proportions of homeless households in temporary accommodation across England as of 31 December 2019, according to MHCLG figures.
Click to expand...

For instance, among local authorities where less than one household per 100,000 is in temporary accommodation, the average coronavirus death rate per 100,000 people is 27.4. But for areas where more than 15 households per 100,000 are in temporary accommodation, the average death rate is 102.9. Again, Newham has the highest temporary accommodation rate in the country, at 46 households per 100,000.
Click to expand...

The graph indicates a clear link between areas where the council is struggling most to source adequate permanent housing for everyone that needs it and those where most people are dying from coronavirus.
Click to expand...

Obviously this is only part of the explanation for the differences in the rates of Coronavirus deaths between different areas but nonetheless it is quite striking.

(The author also created a short twitter thread with links to some of the sources used. Archived here).
 
danny la rouge said:
It was absolutely fantastic to be able to see my elder daughter in the shared garden at the back of my flat this morning. We sat on rugs and chatted for a couple of hours. My mood has been lifted immeasurably.

Sadly it'll be longer before I get to see the younger one in the flesh - she lives in Leith.
Click to expand...
Personally I feel it is unreasonable and unacceptable that you appear to prioritise your close family over urban75, where your recent absence has been noted.
 
If they say furlough contributions are gradually being reduced across the board, then surely they have to let the affected businesses re-open, otherwise jobs and businesses will be lost? So if pubs, bars and restaurants can't trade what then? Sunak says eight months is 'generous', but this seems like simplistic politics rather than government.
 
Can't be confident about what thread, or forum, in which to put this excellent Barry Glendinning article (Saturday Guardian)

But IMO it's a ridiculously brilliant condemnation of 'decisions' to allow the Cheltenham 'Festival' ;) and Liverpool v Atletico at Anfield to go ahead in mid-March :mad:
Worry not, sport-averse Urbans -- it's only technically a sport article -- much more political!! :cool:
Barry Glendinning said:
.... the Tory MP for Tewkesbury, Laurence Robertson, was also extremely vocal in his support for the lucrative racing festival that takes place annually in his constituency.
“The disruption to people’s lives, and the risk to their livelihoods, caused by cancelling events and activities would be too great to justify [cancelling] at the moment,” Robertson said in the buildup. “This assessment would include the potential costs to local businesses in Gloucestershire, which would run into tens of millions, if the Festival were to be cancelled. This morning the chief medical officer endorsed this approach"
A noted racing enthusiast who subsequently came under fire for failing to declare in time all of the £4,000 worth of hospitality he received over the four days of Festival, Robertson put his tardiness down to an oversight.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Just heard the case made that we are at Stage 4 and the government said they'd ease lock down only when we got to Stage 3. SAGE say we are still at 4, Government reducing lockdown anyway. Supposedly asked about this at the briefing today, and it was skillfully ignored.
So much for "led by the science". Pure politics going on here.

Apologes if point has been made already - I checked the last two pages

TELEMMGLPICT000231207882_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpeg
 
ska invita said:
Just heard the case made that we are at Stage 4 and the government said they'd ease lock down only when we got to Stage 3. SAGE say we are still at 4, Government reducing lockdown anyway. Supposedly asked about this at the briefing today, and it was skillfully ignored.
So much for "led by the science". Pure politics going on here.


TELEMMGLPICT000231207882_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpeg
Click to expand...
Depends which science ?
 
David Clapson said:
Let's have a look at the case for ending social distancing for the non-vulnerable. The infection rate is only 7% in England. There's other data to suggest the virus is getting less infectious. We've already killed off many of our over 70s by not protecting care homes. If we can provide enough PPE for hospital staff and carers, and protect people in care homes and vulnerable people in their own homes, ending social distancing outside those places would lead to a certain number of deaths. But pubs, coffee shops, restaurants and tourist venues could reopen. Lots of other businesses too. If not there will be masses more unemployment, partly because the furlough money is running out. (I think it's projected to cost £90bn within the next few months.) More mental health problems, suicides, less money for social services, education, benefits and the |NHS, more and more poverty, huuuge numbers of early deaths because of delays to cancer detection and treatment. My gut feel is that the years of life lost by ending social distancing will be a much smaller number than years lost by a longer recession. We need a sensible courageous government to look at this choice. I think Johnson is weak and drifting and may collapse physically. Then I think the 1922 committee would just appoint Gove as PM.
Click to expand...

I feel that at some stage soon I need a nice long break from talking about the pandemic on this forum. Its going to be a challenge, because so far I've felt like I have developed some sort of obligation to respond to a range of viewpoints and very much to respond to this sort of one. And normally I respond with a draining mix of things I would consider facts, some concepts and info about the story so far, and a rather angry bunch of emtional responses when I think the position being presented is foolish and deadly.

I cannot sustain that. I wasnt the sort of person that could argue endlessly about brexit for a number of years. It will be the same with a bunch of core issues with this pandemic and the human response to it. So let this be my notice that during June I wont be doing this, all manner of positions that I consider wrong, impossible or otherwise doomed could be mentioned in these threads and I will not be there to respond in the way people are used to.

As for this final occasion, I will skip much of what I would normally say, people should be able to guess a bunch of it anyway. Let me just say this - if people want to argue about lockdown and the most extreme of measures that is one thing, about whether that stuff will be necessary in future. But dont waste your time talking shit about a world you might think we can return to where there is no social distancing at all. Because I dont se that from even the successful countries, none of them involve normal life as it used to be with no social distancing. And actually reopening things is only one part of the story, the detail of how humans can behave and distance within those spaces is where much of the action is. Likewise there is no point imagining an economic picture of the future that is too simple, because the economics will be far more complicated than open or closed. For example, if public confidence in how safe all sorts of things are is eroded because people perceive that the government has acted too soon or too recklessly, then it doesnt matter if businesses have reopened. In fact, they might even be in a worse financial situation than if they had remained closed and on government financial life-support. Because its not just social distancing measures that can reduce a businesses ability to get in enough customers to turn a profit, its also about those customers feeling safe enough to want to use that business in the first place.

Anyway I hear that a whole load of SAGE documents and minutes have come out so now I'm likely to put much of my remaining energy into sifting through those in the coming days, then maybe I will take my long break.

So far all I have read is the following BBC story about it. A story that also reminded me that I wasnt entirely happy with all of my posts here in recent days. Posts where I was complaining about peoples gloomy attitudes. Where I was trying to encourage a particular sense of proportion about things in terms of how much peoples actions have helped. And how various lockdown relaxations, and lapsed behavioural restraint from some, doesnt mean we are certainly doomed to more heavy pandemic waves and associated lockdowns etc. Probably the reason I'm not completely happy with what I said is that the obvious flaw is in the logic of where we are right now - my attempts to have a period of mental recharging before fixating on future woes is rather spoilt by the idea that there probably isnt very much wiggle room in the first place. ie the wiggle room in regards R, the current levels of ongoing infection in the community, etc. It been many weeks now since I said it would be important to try to give people some kind of relaxed something for morale etc purposes, but I cannot honestly say that all the benchmarks for the size of our epidemic are where I would want them to be at this stage. And it sounds like there is a bunch of stuff in some of the SAGE documents that rather underscore the delicate nature of the current situation in the UK with the virus.

www.bbc.co.uk

Coronavirus: Relaxing lockdown 'risky' and a 'political decision'

Warning from top scientist advising government says cases are still at very high levels.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
Last edited:
ska invita said:
I presumed led by SAGE science, not "how many can we cull" Tory science
Click to expand...
True. The whole thing reminds me of local authorities when they went through a period of ‘evidence led’ approaches which was of course entirely subjective and a veritable moving feast of ‘evidence ‘ .
 
elbows said:
I cannot sustain that. I wasnt the sort of person that could argue endlessly about brexit for a number of years. It will be the same with a bunch of core issues with this pandemic and the human response to it. So let this be my notice that during June I wont be doing this, all manner of positions that I consider wrong, impossible or otherwise doomed could be mentioned in these threads and I will not be there to respond in the way people are used to.
Click to expand...

Good to get your strength up to talk endlessly about the no deal brexit coming our way from July! ;)
Thanks for all your efforts elbows - Im sure everyone on the boards agrees. Information from you and others here led to our workplace closing two weeks before lockdown!
 
Last edited:
elbows said:
I feel that at some stage soon I need a nice long break from talking about the pandemic on this forum. Its going to be a challenge, because so far I've felt like I have developed some sort of obligation to respond to a range of viewpoints and very much to respond to this sort of one. And normally I respond with a draining mix of things I would consider facts, some concepts and info about the story so far, and a rather angry bunch of emtional responses when I think the position being presented is foolish and deadly.

I cannot sustain that. I wasnt the sort of person that could argue endlessly about brexit for a number of years. It will be the same with a bunch of core issues with this pandemic and the human response to it. So let this be my notice that during June I wont be doing this, all manner of positions that I consider wrong, impossible or otherwise doomed could be mentioned in these threads and I will not be there to respond in the way people are used to.

As for this final occasion, I will skip much of what I would normally say, people should be able to guess a bunch of it anyway. Let me just say this - if people want to argue about lockdown and the most extreme of measures that is one thing, about whether that stuff will be necessary in future. But dont waste your time talking shit about a world you might think we can return to where there is no social distancing at all. Because I dont se that from even the successful countries, none of them involve normal life as it used to be with no social distancing. And actually reopening things is only one part of the story, the detail of how humans can behave and distance within those spaces is where much of the action is. Likewise there is no point imagining an economic picture of the future that is too simple, because the economics will be far more complicated than open or closed. For example, if public confidence in how safe all sorts of things are is eroded because people perceive that the government has acted too soon or too recklessly, then it doesnt matter if businesses have reopened. In fact, they might even be in a worse financial situation than if they had remained closed and on government financial life-support. Because its not just social distancing measures that can reduce a businesses ability to get in enough customers to turn a profit, its also about those customers feeling safe enough to want to use that business in the first place.

Anyway I hear that a whole load of SAGE documents and minutes have come out so now I'm likely to put much of my remaining energy into sifting through those in the coming days, then maybe I will take my long break.

So far all I have read is the following BBC story about it. A story that also reminded me that I wasnt entirely happy with all of my posts here in recent days. Posts where I was complaining about peoples gloomy attitudes. Where I was trying to encourage a particular sense of proportion about things in terms of how much peoples actions have helped. And how various lockdown relaxations, and lapsed behavioural restraint from some, doesnt mean we are certainly doomed to more heavy pandemic waves and associated lockdowns etc. Probably the reason I'm not completely happy with what I said is that the obvious flaw is in the logic of where we are right now - my attempts to have a period of mental recharging before fixating on future woes is rather spoilt by the idea that there probably isnt very much wiggle room in the first place. ie the wiggle room in regards R, the current levels of ongoing infection in the community, etc. It been many weeks now since I said it would be important to try to give people some kind of relaxed something for morale etc purposes, but I cannot honestly say that all the benchmarks for the size of our epidemic are where I would want them to be at this stage. And it sounds like there is a bunch of stuff in some of the SAGE documents that rather underscore the delicate nature of the current situation in the UK with the virus.

www.bbc.co.uk

Coronavirus: Relaxing lockdown 'risky' and a 'political decision'

Warning from top scientist advising government says cases are still at very high levels.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...


Well thanks very much for your contributions so far which I have found informative and illuminating, I know others have too. Enjoy your break!:D:cool:
 
ska invita said:
Just heard the case made that we are at Stage 4 and the government said they'd ease lock down only when we got to Stage 3. SAGE say we are still at 4, Government reducing lockdown anyway. Supposedly asked about this at the briefing today, and it was skillfully ignored.
Click to expand...

I generally recommend ignoring the simplified stages system anyway, and concentrate more on the various indicators and models and things particular people say.

Todays news along these lines can be generated by a mix of the sage minutes that have been released, various documents that have been released, but also what various scientists, including people who might happen to be in SAGE, have been saying to the media. I am only at the start of looking at documents, havent looked at any minutes yet, and havent had time for much in the way of reading media articles apart from the BBC one I linked to in my last post.

I believe this is probably a key document, but do keep in mind its from early May rather than more recently. They havent released any really recent minutes etc so the more recent SAGE picture is still not available to us.

SPI-M-O: Consensus view on the potential relaxing of social distancing measures (4 May 2020)

Its not very long and much as it is tempting for me to post things like the grfaphs from it, I would have to go on about too many caveats and its better for people to understand the context of those model and the scenarios they are trying to model themselves.


I will quote this one point though because its long been on my mind:

High levels of health care acquired infections and cases in care homes makes it very difficult to accurately estimate the current value of R due to community transmission, and therefore the impact of future policy changes on the trajectory of the epidemic.
Click to expand...

Since that was written we have the pilot ONS/Oxford surveys and some other progress might have been made in trying to separate the community epidemic picture from healthcare and care home pictures. And its mostly only in the period after that paper was written that we've been getting official R estimates published.

Anyway, the document, when combined with our knowledge about what measures Johnson has already announced is really quite interesting, and should give people more clues about what sort of national picture was being modelled under various scenarios, what timescales and phases to expect that our contact tracing etc actually needs to be really good to stand a chance of keeping infection levels down, and also some clues about what else the government planned and when it might be. But again keep in mind that this stuff is already well out of date, and the models themselves may well need to have been corrected further since then to keep in tune with what actually happened to the death rate etc in subsequent weeks.

Thanks for the nice words about my break etc. I've not gone yet and will likely not be 100% gone even in June, just trying to take a back seat in certain areas that are exhausting and repetitive.
 
ska invita said:
Just heard the case made that we are at Stage 4 and the government said they'd ease lock down only when we got to Stage 3. SAGE say we are still at 4, Government reducing lockdown anyway. Supposedly asked about this at the briefing today, and it was skillfully ignored.
So much for "led by the science". Pure politics going on here.

Apologes if point has been made already - I checked the last two pages

TELEMMGLPICT000231207882_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpeg
Click to expand...
What's going on at Levels 4 and 5 in the Action column re "current ... measures" and "today's level"?

If there's going to be a system of alert levels, does it not need to be at least a little bit fucking constant?
 
Mation said:
What's going on at Levels 4 and 5 in the Action column re "current ... measures" and "today's level"?

If there's going to be a system of alert levels, does it not need to be at least a little bit fucking constant?
Click to expand...
i think they have a more detailed one of these out there? this was clearly knocked up one afternoon to give the impression they were doing something and in some kind of orderly fashion
 
elbows I am new to U75, from following a link to the now invisible ‘NHS...How’s it going...’ thread that was posted on... it might have been on one of mumsnet’s more intelligent threads.
I don’t know your age, gender, whether your interest in analysis of statistics is professional or purely personal, nor have I ever looked at your posting history, but I warmly appreciate the time you have devoted to these analyses, and to posting articulate, engaging and very readable comments, and, often, graphs and links, so generously.
Thank you, and do be kind to yourself.
 
ska invita said:
i think they have a more detailed one of these out there? this was clearly knocked up one afternoon to give the impression they were doing something and in some kind of orderly fashion
Click to expand...
I'm not going to put any money on there being a more detailed version :D

I'm reminded of the bar chart that used to be on the back of a box of Kellogg's cornflakes. It had several bars at different heights and in various bright colours. And no title, or labels on the axes at all. Wasn't referred to in the blurb. It just looked vaguely sciency, whilst being entirely meaningless.
 
20Bees said:
elbows I am new to U75, from following a link to the now invisible ‘NHS...How’s it going...’ thread that was posted on... it might have been on one of mumsnet’s more intelligent threads.
I don’t know your age, gender, whether your interest in analysis of statistics is professional or purely personal, nor have I ever looked at your posting history, but I warmly appreciate the time you have devoted to these analyses, and to posting articulate, engaging and very readable comments, and, often, graphs and links, so generously.
Thank you, and do be kind to yourself.
Click to expand...
if you get your post count up to 50 posts you'll be able to see that thread and the "hidden" forum its in 20Bees :thumbs:
you can always post any old nonsense on this thread to get your count up:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

elbows
UK Inquiry Module 3: Impact on UK Healthcare Systems
2 3
Replies
71
Views
1K
elbows
elbows
elbows
UK Inquiry Module 1: Resilience and preparedness
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
165
Views
6K
elbows
elbows
elbows
UK Inquiry Module 2: Decision-making & political governance
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
173
Views
4K
elbows
elbows
frogwoman
Shanghai lockdown
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
skyscraper101
skyscraper101
editor
Professional football and coronavirus
Replies
6
Views
572
elbows
elbows
Back
Top Bottom