Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

What I don't get at the moment is what is driving these localised spikes. Are we just all agreeing that Geordies, Scousers and Brummies are worse at following the rules than everyone else in the UK? Seems unlikely that human behaviour will differ greatly between parts of the same country.

I think that probably is the case but throughout this blame has been a useless concept (its pretty useless most of the time anyway). I think it's all about how we act as humans in groups and there is a critical mass to compliance. I think that compliance with safety measures can easily drop off if enough people are seen to be not complying and it goes the same for complying.

I'll give you an example from where I live. In my London borough compliance is really high and this has nothing to do with age, class, ethnic background or whatever. There is a very big Tesco just down the road whose customers are from all backgrounds and all walks of life. I would say mask compliance is around 98% including staff. Yet I hear stories from elsewhere in London where they are barely scraping 50%. Round here I see groups of people in the parks bigger than six but they are all sat apart like we were in April.

I think we're lucky round here that non-compliance stands out and so people kind of just fit in. That could all change though and quickly if enough people stop bothering.

That's my theory anyway.

ETA: I should add I don't think this is the sole reason by any means but it plays a role.
 
I suspect that around London and the south-east specifically, the extreme death count of the early pandemic has made people particularly cautious as a whole (even if many individuals are not). Plus there are a lot of people who have been able to work from home, which has thinned out the density of people on public transport and shops and services etc within the city, making those who have to travel for work safer. Then we have the oft-cited reasons around the nature of work in different places and the relative risks associated with different types of workplace

A lot of it’s to do with money and access to wfh. The south east is fairly affluent, lots of outdoor spaces, lots of people able to work from home. It’s already gone through London so that’s less of a risk.

Now that people are “encouraged” to go back to work and restrictions lifted it’s hitting other urban areas and people who can’t just wfh.
 
A lot of it’s to do with money and access to wfh. The south east is fairly affluent, lots of outdoor spaces, lots of people able to work from home. It’s already gone through London so that’s less of a risk.

Now that people are “encouraged” to go back to work and restrictions lifted it’s hitting other urban areas and people who can’t just wfh.

WFH definitely plays some part, in that a lot of service-sector jobs can be done from home whereas industrial ones usually can't. As you say, that might be why much of the south-east has done okay. However, using the two examples I stuck up above, both Bolton and Hull are pretty industrial and yet the situation in the two cities is very different.

I think another factor may well be connectivity. Hull's geographical isolation has probably worked in its favour, whereas Bolton is part of a larger conurbation. But again, that doesn't work in every case because London is by far the best connected city in the country and yet it's doing alright atm.

Population density probably has some influence, just because more people in close proximity = easier transmission. I'm sure, though, that if you dig around the figures you could find some dense cities (London springs to mind) doing fine and some pretty rural areas (Cumbria, perhaps) that aren't.

Poverty is another obvious influence, in that with that comes overcrowding, employers who don't give a shit, and so on. That seems partly to have driven the Leicester spike a few weeks ago. But again, Hull is the poorest large city in the UK, so not an explanation in itself.

In the end there's a big array of socioeconomic, geographical and other factors at play, and we're nowhere near understanding how they interact with one another.
 
Last edited:
How do you know it has nothing to do with any of those things?

Because like a lot of London there are all backgrounds here. Its cheek by jowl living. Also putting it down to just one borough is wrong because I see the same in the borough right next to us as well.
 
People who rely on seeing your lips move to understand what you are saying
Surely there is a phone app (speech to text) that can show (as text) what you are saying?

I saw an article a while back from an ambulance medic who was using this format to communicate with people who had hearing issues. He just held his phone up and asked them questions, was very good.
 
Just been told we can’t wear masks at work anymore for reasons of access, so we have to wear visors instead. I don’t feel safe with just a visor. Are they allowed to do this?
face masks with a clear panel?

mentioned by action for hearing loss as an option. Face coverings: how the regulations apply to you - Action on Hearing Loss


edit: also found instructions to make one (figure that's not for you Orang Utan but someone with appropriate skills might) How to Make An Accessible, Deaf-Friendly Face Mask | Hearing, Speech & Deaf Center
 
face masks with a clear panel?

mentioned by action for hearing loss as an option. Face coverings: how the regulations apply to you - Action on Hearing Loss
This also ^

Get your employer to buy these (and a phone 'speech to text' solution) because it will be cheaper and better than sick employees and infected clients.
 
A lot of it’s to do with money and access to wfh. The south east is fairly affluent, lots of outdoor spaces, lots of people able to work from home. It’s already gone through London so that’s less of a risk.

Now that people are “encouraged” to go back to work and restrictions lifted it’s hitting other urban areas and people who can’t just wfh.
I'm in Preston (Number 4 in the ranking whooo) and WFH isn't really a thing here anymore if the morning traffic is anything to go by. We're all back in the office at work (although not through necessity - everyone wanted to come back)

I was talking to my brother who lives in a London commuter town in the south east this morning and half the kids in his kid's class are still off, which suggests a much more cautious approach round there (and parents still at home...)
 
Relevant guidelines
Employers should support their workers in using face coverings safely if they choose to wear one. It is not mandatory for shop or supermarket, indoor shopping centres, banks, building societies, post office workers, premises providing professional, legal or financial services and auction houses to wear face coverings although the government recommends that businesses consider their use where appropriate and where other mitigations are not in place. Employers should continue to follow ‘COVID-19 secure’ guidelines to reduce the proximity and duration of contact between employees.

Businesses already have legal obligations to protect their staff under existing employment law. This means taking appropriate steps to provide a safe working environment, which may include face coverings where appropriate, alongside other mitigations such as screens and social distancing.
From Shops and branches - Working safely during coronavirus (COVID-19) - Guidance - GOV.UK

Obviously access is an issue, but surely the solution is either clear masks (provided by employer) or being willing to remove mask (and wear visor) when someone requests it for lipreading purposes, not risking employee and public health.
 
Surely there is a phone app (speech to text) that can show (as text) what you are saying?

I saw an article a while back from an ambulance medic who was using this format to communicate with people who had hearing issues. He just held his phone up and asked them questions, was very good.
Not allowed mobiles at work (though everyone ignores this)
 
WFH definitely plays some part, in that a lot of service-sector jobs can be done from home whereas industrial ones usually can't. As you say, that might be why much of the south-east has done okay. However, using the two examples I stuck up above, both Bolton and Hull are pretty industrial and yet the situation in the two cities is very different.

I think another factor may well be connectivity. Hull's geographical isolation has probably worked in its favour, whereas Bolton is part of a larger conurbation. But again, that doesn't work in every case because London is by far the best connected city in the country and yet it's doing alright atm.

Population density probably has some influence, just because more people in close proximity = easier transmission. I'm sure, though, that if you dig around the figures you could find some dense cities (London springs to mind) doing fine and some pretty rural areas (Cumbria, perhaps) that aren't.

Poverty is another obvious influence, in that with that comes overcrowding, employers who don't give a shit, and so on. That seems partly to have driven the Leicester spike a few weeks ago. But again, Hull is the poorest large city in the UK, so not an explanation in itself.

In the end there's a big array of socioeconomic, geographical and other factors at play, and we're nowhere near understanding how they interact with one another.

A study I read recently claimed that differences in age structure accounted for around 90% of the differences in infection fatality rate between European nations. There are certainly very significant age structure differences in London at the council ward level and probably at borough level too. Such contrasts must exist elsewhere in the UK.
 
A study I read recently claimed that differences in age structure accounted for around 90% of the differences in infection fatality rate between European nations. There are certainly very significant age structure differences in London at the council ward level and probably at borough level too. Such contrasts must exist elsewhere in the UK.
It’sa fair point but in this instance we’re talking about infection rates themselves rather than fatalities
 
A study I read recently claimed that differences in age structure accounted for around 90% of the differences in infection fatality rate between European nations. There are certainly very significant age structure differences in London at the council ward level and probably at borough level too. Such contrasts must exist elsewhere in the UK.

Oh yes, age structures will definitely come into it too, not just in terms of deaths but also infections. To put it crudely, if there's a local outbreak driven by workplace transmissions that isn't going to hit the retired in the first instance, although that's not to say that they won't pick it up elsewhere further down the line. Conversely, there has been a spike amongst younger people, who probably are more willing to take risks - not because they're stupid, irresponsible or whatever else the Daily Express like to call them, but because they're less at risk, relatively mobile, and because in some cases they've no alternative.
 
This doesn't make sense to me, and will probably drive elbows mad.

Professor Chris Whitty, England's chief medical officer and Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's chief scientific adviser, warned the prime minister at a meeting on on Wednesday evening that the disease was now doubling every seven to eight days.

It is understood they warned the UK is now about six weeks behind France and Spain and in danger of seeing a substantial increase in the number of cases by mid-October if the virus is left unchecked.

We already have twice the number of cases that France had 6 weeks ago, with similiar populations. :hmm:

 
Just checked Bristol's score. Relieved to see it's down to 11 / 100K. There are certainly peple going out from what I've seen. Though I've not been and would avoid any where busy in doors. It's a mixed city of course, not all middle class new media jobs done from home. Large call centres and stuff but not much factory / industrial work in the city itself. Students not back yet.
 
Our local rag is reporting that Wolverhampton will be going into lockdown next Tuesday - yet no confirmation from the council or government, no mention in the national press and as far as I can tell we are not even on the watchlist. I'm sure we are in for further restrictions, but this is just down right lying and scaremongering surely?


eta: just noticed the caveat of 'unless cases stop rising'... that wasn't on the article when I first read it this morning, nor is it on the article on their facebook page
 
Last edited:
Dreading the students getting back into university towns.
I foresee that producing another spike in CV cases, before the current batch have died down.

People who are currently out and about, so therefore causing & taking risks, need to realise that the virus is still as infectious as before the March lockdown. They need to take all the proper precautions.
I quite like the "Hands, Face, Space" mantra - the radio ads are very much to that point.

Personally, my thoughts are that we can have work, or schools, or pubs, but not all three at once, at least until the majority of vaccinations are done.

Currently, I'm in an area covered by the Tyne & Wear / Northumberland / Durham restrictions.

The next two / three weeks will need careful behaviours ...
 
Back
Top Bottom