Local lockdown in Greater Manchester, East Lancashire and parts of West Yorkshire - Discussion

[AdamWW]

Because the 1.5 Million direct COVID deaths is so far removed from anything we've seen in reality, that it's obviously wrong. Not even Fergurson was suggesting numbers that high, and he generally over-predicts by an order of magnitude or two.

So why do you think the bit you quoted is right?

The 1.5 million figure quoted in the report is largely deaths due to the collapse of the health service expected to take place without mitigation, not direct deaths due to Covid-19.

 

[takno]

I wonder why you would omit this bit?

Because it's clearly just a lame arse-covering exercise. I mean 1.5 million is 2.5% of the entire population. Nobody has seen or believed in the death rate that high even for the actually infected. If anybody on SAGE is still expounding that kind of fringe science then they need to be off sage ASAP

 

[AdamWW]

Post deleted - off topic and it included an image that I couldn't usefully give a text description to.

 

[Yew]

So why do you think the bit you quoted is right?

The 1.5 million figure quoted in the report is largely deaths due to the collapse of the health service expected to take place without mitigation, not direct deaths due to Covid-19.

Because it is the primary focus of the report, the reference to Fergursons work is only there to add a little flavour. (And also considered an "unmitigated case" which is different to simply "no lockdown") And seems to be a fairly straightforward quotation of the work, which as we have seen, is inherently flawed. (I.E. they're stating what Fergurson said, not suggesting that it's a conclusion from their own workings)

 

[DB]

The 1.5 million figure quoted in the report is largely deaths due to the collapse of the health service expected to take place without mitigation, not direct deaths due to Covid-19.

But the peak came before the lockdown measures could have had much effect, and the NHS was nowhere near to being overwhelmed.

 

[AdamWW]

Because it's clearly just a lame arse-covering exercise. I mean 1.5 million is 2.5% of the entire population. Nobody has seen or believed in the death rate that high even for the actually infected. If anybody on SAGE is still expounding that kind of fringe science then they need to be off sage ASAP

The 1.5 million figure quoted in the report is largely deaths due to the collapse of the health service expected to take place without mitigation, not direct deaths due to Covid-19.

 

[DB]

I hope the authors of this report from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (in Stockholm) won't mind me reproducing this:

That report is conflating recommendations to stay at home with mandated stay at home - the two are massively different.

 

[Yew]

I hope the authors of this report from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (in Stockholm) won't mind me reproducing this:

A) That graph really is horrible!
b) I think it gives false equivalency of some measures, as "Enforced stay at home orders" have the same area as "Recommended Teleworking"
C) Really, I don't like that graphic, its a terrible way of showing the data.

 

[AdamWW]

Because it is the primary focus of the report, the reference to Fergursons work is only there to add a little flavour. (And also considered an "unmitigated case" which is different to simply "no lockdown") And seems to be a fairly straightforward quotation of the work, which as we have seen, is inherently flawed. (I.E. they're stating what Fergurson said, not suggesting that it's a conclusion from their own workings)

OK put aside the numbers they gave for no mitigation.

The conclusion was that "when morbidity is taken into account, the estimates for the health impacts from a lockdown and lockdown induced recession are greater in terms of QALYs than the direct COVID-19 deaths. "

I.e. with a lockdown, there is a greater indirect than direct impact on health.

That statement gives no information on whether a lockdown is justified because it's not comparing the situation without one.

 

[AdamWW]

That report is conflating recommendations to stay at home with mandated stay at home - the two are massively different.

You are conflating "recommendation" with "instructed to even though it's not actually a criminal offence".

 

[DB]

You are conflating "recommendation" with "instructed to even though it's not actually a criminal offence".

Ah, right - so you are saying that the lockdown here earlier in the year didn't really happen?

 

[Yew]

OK put aside the numbers they gave for no mitigation.

The conclusion was that "when morbidity is taken into account, the estimates for the health impacts from a lockdown and lockdown induced recession are greater in terms of QALYs than the direct COVID-19 deaths. "

I.e. with a lockdown, there is a greater indirect than direct impact on health.

That statement gives no information on whether a lockdown is justified because it's not comparing the situation without one.

The suggestion that the measures we've implemented are causing more harm that the virus seems to me to indicate that we're certainly not at a local minima.

 

[AdamWW]

Ah, right - so you are saying that the lockdown here earlier in the year didn't really happen?

I have just realised we are getting way off topic so I'd better make this my last post on this here.

But, no, I'm saying that in Sweden things like not making non-essential travel were not phrased as recommendations, they were phrased as instructions, even though not actually a criminal offence.

 

[DB]

I have just realised we are getting way off topic so I'd better make this my last post on this here.

But, no, I'm saying that in Sweden things like not making non-essential travel were not phrased as recommendations, they were phrased as instructions, even though not actually a criminal offence.

That doesn't alter the fact that their approach was more light touch - that graph gives false equivalency to measures in different countries which were actually very different in reality.

 

[Mag_seven]

Can we please discuss local lockdowns in this thread and keep discussion of Sweden to this thread please:

So, Sweden may well have been right.....

This graph is very significant : Remember, Sweden has had no significant lockdown (BBC News link). It certainly make me even more sure we (and most of the world) have gone down the wrong path...... I have always thought this lockdown and social distancing (they're two sides of the same coin...

www.railforums.co.uk

thanks

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It doesn't help that nobody outside of West Yorkshire knows where "Kirklees" is, because it's a made-up place. When enrolling at University I was told "oh, you don't sound Scottish!" I wish I'd kept quiet as it might have resulted in Holyrood subsidising my tuition!

 

[yorksrob]

It doesn't help that nobody outside of West Yorkshire knows where "Kirklees" is, because it's a made-up place. When enrolling at University I was told "oh, you don't sound Scottish!" I wish I'd kept quiet as it might have resulted in Holyrood subsidising my tuition!

Were you not wearing the Kirklees tartan

 

[Bantamzen]

Meanwhile, in a part of West Yorkshire where many areas haven't seen a covid case or deeath in weeks we are left wondering why we still cannot meet up with other members of our family when people in Northampton can. Its almost as if we are being used as scapegoats....

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Meanwhile, in a part of West Yorkshire where many areas haven't seen a covid case or deeath in weeks we are left wondering why we still cannot meet up with other members of our family when people in Northampton can. Its almost as if we are being used as scapegoats....

Used as examples rather than scapegoats.
To let other areas know what will happen to them if they don't fully comply with authoritarian restrictions of unproven benefit.

I'm really beginning to think that 'they' want everyone to just wake, work, sleep and have no other life except that, and repeat until death. 'They' being the leaders of the country and key advisors.

 

[chorleyjeff]

Coronavirus: Lockdown tightened in parts of northern England

There is to be a local lockdown in parts of Northern England, including Greater Manchester. Can't help but think this might have something to do with the raves?

I also wonder whether an increase in testing locally is catching more cases. Either way, this sucks and is a massive blow to the people of the city, as we move backwards yet again.
For the moment it seems the ban is on people from two households meeting in their homes, but people can still go to the bars, pubs and restaurants?

How are people from Manchester feeling about this, how will this affect your plans?

Stay sane, stay safe folks! This is likely gonna drag on for a long time...

But people meeting in homes will probably spend more time close together in tight spaces. Problem is lots of small houses with too many people in many of them. Not their fault and in some ways admirable that families stay together to look after their old folk.

 

[chorleyjeff]

I’d say it relies entirely on voluntary compliance, perhaps with the exception of places of worship if that is what this is partly aimed at?

The question is, who is listening to Boris any more?

Voluntary compliance has not been universal from day 1. Many people do not believe they should comply with "their" laws.

 

[DB]

Voluntary compliance has not been universal from day 1. Many people do not believe they should comply with "their" laws.

There was a high level of compliance at the beginning, when there was a clear aim and some level of consistency from the government. Now there is little evidence of either, and no end in sight, people are increasingly ignoring it - unsurprisingly.

 

[Yew]

Used as examples rather than scapegoats.
To let other areas know what will happen to them if they don't fully comply with authoritarian restrictions of unproven benefit.

Indeed, 1984 is starting to look palatable compared to the dystopia we're now living in.

 

[Huntergreed]

Indeed, 1984 is starting to look palatable compared to the dystopia we're now living in.

I’ve seen a few comments like this, calling the disease “COVID-1984”.

I actually dread to think what would happen for a virus with a much higher death rate (10+%) and how severe the restrictions would be, given just how harsh they’ve been for one with a 0.5% death rate.

 

[DB]

I’ve seen a few comments like this, calling the disease “COVID-1984”.

I actually dread to think what would happen for a virus with a much higher death rate (10+%) and how severe the restrictions would be, given just how harsh they’ve been for one with a 0.5% death rate.

Just hope there's never an Ebola pandemic!

 

[SuspectUsual]

I'm really beginning to think that 'they' want everyone to just wake, work, sleep and have no other life except that, and repeat until death. 'They' being the leaders of the country and key advisors

You missed out “spend”. People must do that at every opportunity

 

[317 forever]

It doesn't help that nobody outside of West Yorkshire knows where "Kirklees" is, because it's a made-up place. When enrolling at University I was told "oh, you don't sound Scottish!" I wish I'd kept quiet as it might have resulted in Holyrood subsidising my tuition!

Also, if you pronounce it like "Kairklees" it would sound as though it was near Liverpool, a bit like Kirkby, and West Kirby for that matter.

 

[Jozhua]

Being about Manchester, social distancing is starting to break down on public transport as ridership increases back to previous levels, except with reduced service. Compliance with face covering rules is going down too, although I have noticed more companies keeping the windows open by default, which is good. An increasing number of buses are passing stops due to being "full", leading passengers to just crowd onto the next bus and make that even more full than otherwise. Clearly all of these people are acting with selfish intention. I'm sorry but lives > feeding your family!!! :/

Northern rail is getting used to running service with delays again, which feels like a big move back to normality. More strikes and cancellations and it will feel like usual again. The only saving grace for those who are struggling to adjust to a somewhat dependable service, is that reductions in the number of trains running is helping to keep things closer to the crowded inconvenience of the before times. Ticket machines are also designed to maximise the amount you have to touch them and, from my experience trying to use them, the mobile ticketing apps are also "broken for your convenience".

As pedestrians continue to navigate narrow streets, passing at 2m is impossible and those meeting in groups are staying close together by default. The only saving grace with extra-household meetings being that contact tracing (and therefore assignment of blame), is much easier.

Rents continue to be very high, albeit some reductions in the city centre in recent weeks. This ensures multi-generational families are encouraged to live in as close quarters as possible, to continue to live while receiving 80% of income from their minimum wage jobs. Doctors services continue to be a complete mess, which allows the UK to continue its "world-beating" slaughter of old people via neglect.

Local universities are finalising plans to exonerate themselves of any blame come September, by making sure campuses will comply with social distancing for at least the first week. Freshers activities will also be done online, via "Zoom" to help encourage heightened feelings of loneliness and isolation among freshers. As A-level results come through, decided by postcode and often downgraded, the clearing system is likely to be used at record levels to assign university places. This is helping to send a very positive message to our nation's young of "However hard you work, however capable you are...it doesn't matter. Your life will still be determined by arbitrary metrics, based on where you happen to live and your parents income. Any break from this chain will be determined by an arbitrary roll of the dice and any attempt to break this cycle through hard work and aptitude will be futile. Also, good luck getting a job...you're gonna need it. Next months rent is £500."

Just hope there's never an Ebola pandemic!

Ebola is too deadly to spread really. (Kills almost everyone it infects before they can spread too much.) It also makes you sick pretty fast. Still, if it hit an urban area, it would be considerably worse than the past outbreaks.

I guess the only upside is there is a couple vaccines out there for Ebola I believe, so creating a vaccine for a new strain would be pretty easy, in comparison to starting from scratch with the Corona.

 

[317 forever]

Meanwhile, in a part of West Yorkshire where many areas haven't seen a covid case or deeath in weeks we are left wondering why we still cannot meet up with other members of our family when people in Northampton can. Its almost as if we are being used as scapegoats....

I also noticed how other areas of the country such as Swindon had surges without restrictions imposed, but case numbers have already dipped back.

Latest weekly Covid-19 rates for local authority areas in England

Northampton is currently recording the highest rate, thanks to an outbreak in a sandwich factory.

uk.yahoo.com

Latest weekly Covid-19 rates for local authority areas in England
Ian Jones, PA
2 days ago
Here is Friday’s update of the rolling seven-day rate of new cases of Covid-19 for every local authority in England.
The figures, for the seven days to August 11, are based on tests carried out in laboratories (pillar one of the Government’s testing programme) and in the wider community (pillar two).
The rate is expressed as the number of new cases per 100,000 people.
Data for the most recent three days (August 12-14) has been excluded as it is incomplete and likely to be revised.

(PA graphic)
Northampton has the highest rate, thanks to an outbreak at the Greencore sandwich factory in the town.
A total of 260 new cases were recorded in Northampton in the seven days to August 11, the equivalent of 115.8 per 100,000 people – up from 34.7 in the previous seven days to August 4.
In Oldham the rate has jumped from 68.7 to 112.2, with 266 new cases recorded.
Blackburn with Darwen is third, where the rate has increased slightly from 82.2 to 88.2 with 132 new cases.
In Pendle the rate is unchanged at 84.7 with 78 new cases, while Leicester has seen a rise from 55.3 to 68.0, with 241 new cases.
Other areas recording notable week-on-week jumps include:
– Rochdale (up from 36.0 to 45.0, with 100 new cases)
– Manchester (up from 34.9 to 40.7, with 225 new cases)
– Kirklees (up from 26.6 to 34.3, with 151 new cases)
– Birmingham (up from 13.8 to 28.1, with 321 new cases)

A saddle table is cleaned at Leicester racecourse (Tony Knapton/PA)
The list has been calculated by the PA news agency and is based on Public Health England data published on August 14 on the Government’s coronavirus online dashboard.
Here is the list in full. From left to right, it reads: name of local authority; rate of new cases in the seven days to August 11; number (in brackets) of new cases recorded in the seven days to August 11; rate of new cases in the seven days to August 4; number (in brackets) of new cases recorded in the seven days to August 4.
Northampton 115.8 (260), 34.7 (78)
Oldham 112.2 (266), 68.7 (163)
Blackburn with Darwen 88.2 (132), 82.2 (123)
Pendle 84.7 (78), 84.7 (78)
Leicester 68.0 (241), 55.3 (196)
Bradford 57.8 (312), 55.6 (300)
Rochdale 45.0 (100), 36.0 (80)
Preston 43.3 (62), 43.3 (62)
Manchester 40.7 (225), 34.9 (193)
Calderdale 37.4 (79), 38.8 (82)
Swindon 37.4 (83), 54.5 (121)
Burnley 36.0 (32), 41.6 (37)
Hyndburn 34.5 (28), 29.6 (24)
Kirklees 34.3 (151), 26.6 (117)
Tameside 33.1 (75), 34.9 (79)
Salford 32.1 (83), 29.7 (77)
Stockport 30.0 (88), 22.8 (67)
Birmingham 28.1 (321), 13.8 (157)
Luton 27.7 (59), 18.3 (39)
Middlesbrough 27.7 (39), 12.1 (17)
Bolton 27.5 (79), 26.4 (76)
Sandwell 26.8 (88), 19.5 (64)
Newark and Sherwood 25.3 (31), 29.4 (36)
Trafford 25.3 (60), 24.9 (59)
Wellingborough 25.1 (20), 23.8 (19)
Slough 24.7 (37), 13.4 (20)
Corby 22.2 (16), 12.5 (9)
Carlisle 22.1 (24), 20.2 (22)
Sheffield 21.9 (128), 10.8 (63)
Bury 21.5 (41), 29.8 (57)
Bassetlaw 20.4 (24), 10.2 (12)
Wakefield 19.5 (68), 14.4 (50)
Peterborough 19.3 (39), 12.9 (26)
Eden 18.8 (10), 13.1 (7)
Watford 18.6 (18), 10.4 (10)
Barnsley 18.6 (46), 12.6 (31)
Melton 17.6 (9), 21.5 (11)
Coventry 17.5 (65), 14.0 (52)
Oxford 17.1 (26), 7.9 (12)
Hounslow 16.9 (46), 14.0 (38)
Woking 15.9 (16), 10.9 (11)
Oadby and Wigston 15.8 (9), 28.1 (16)
Warrington 15.7 (33), 6.2 (13)
Rotherham 15.1 (40), 14.3 (38)
Leeds 14.6 (116), 15.5 (123)
Stoke-on-Trent 14.4 (37), 9.8 (25)
Wolverhampton 14.4 (38), 12.9 (34)
Charnwood 14.0 (26), 14.0 (26)
Cambridge 13.6 (17), 5.6 (7)
Westminster 13.4 (35), 9.2 (24)
Lincoln 13.1 (13), 12.1 (12)
Liverpool 12.9 (64), 13.3 (66)
Redbridge 12.8 (39), 7.5 (23)
Dover 12.7 (15), 7.6 (9)
Rossendale 12.6 (9), 7.0 (5)
Hammersmith and Fulham 12.4 (23), 9.2 (17)
North East Derbyshire 11.8 (12), 5.9 (6)
Kettering 11.8 (12), 5.9 (6)
Copeland 11.7 (8), 7.3 (5)
Derby 11.7 (30), 7.0 (18)
Hackney and City of London 11.3 (33), 18.2 (53)
St. Helens 10.5 (19), 9.4 (17)
Walsall 10.5 (30), 8.8 (25)
Chesterfield 10.5 (11), 3.8 (4)
Hillingdon 10.1 (31), 4.9 (15)
Gloucester 10.1 (13), 3.1 (4)
East Staffordshire 10.0 (12), 6.7 (8)
Rutland 10.0 (4), 0.0 (0)
Bromsgrove 10.0 (10), 5.0 (5)
Ealing 9.9 (34), 9.1 (31)
Knowsley 9.9 (15), 15.2 (23)
Kensington and Chelsea 9.6 (15), 5.1 (8)
Kingston upon Thames 9.6 (17), 3.9 (7)
Newcastle upon Tyne 9.6 (29), 5.0 (15)
Waltham Forest 9.4 (26), 4.0 (11)
South Derbyshire 9.3 (10), 8.4 (9)
Richmondshire 9.3 (5), 1.9 (1)
Brent 9.1 (30), 3.9 (13)
Surrey Heath 9.0 (8), 5.6 (5)
Barking and Dagenham 8.9 (19), 9.9 (21)
Folkestone and Hythe 8.8 (10), 16.8 (19)
Wigan 8.8 (29), 9.1 (30)
Solihull 8.8 (19), 6.5 (14)
West Lancashire 8.7 (10), 15.7 (18)
High Peak 8.6 (8), 10.8 (10)
Blackpool 8.6 (12), 7.9 (11)
Barnet 8.6 (34), 8.1 (32)
South Lakeland 8.6 (9), 9.5 (10)
Halton 8.5 (11), 10.0 (13)
Chorley 8.5 (10), 9.3 (11)
Rugby 8.3 (9), 13.8 (15)
Ribble Valley 8.2 (5), 9.9 (6)
Wandsworth 8.2 (27), 10.0 (33)
Allerdale 8.2 (8), 10.2 (10)
Milton Keynes 8.2 (22), 4.8 (13)
Newham 7.9 (28), 5.4 (19)
Lewes 7.7 (8), 1.9 (2)
North Tyneside 7.7 (16), 1.9 (4)
Hertsmere 7.6 (8), 6.7 (7)
Sefton 7.6 (21), 5.8 (16)
Fylde 7.4 (6), 12.4 (10)
Camden 7.4 (20), 3.0 (8)
Cherwell 7.3 (11), 3.3 (5)
Chiltern 7.3 (7), 3.1 (3)
Telford and Wrekin 7.2 (13), 3.3 (6)
Bromley 7.2 (24), 3.0 (10)
Harrow 7.2 (18), 6.0 (15)
Richmond upon Thames 7.1 (14), 4.5 (9)
Craven 7.0 (4), 0.0 (0)
Nuneaton and Bedworth 6.9 (9), 20.0 (26)
Southwark 6.9 (22), 3.5 (11)
Blaby 6.9 (7), 7.9 (8)
Reading 6.8 (11), 3.1 (5)
Guildford 6.7 (10), 2.0 (3)
Haringey 6.7 (18), 6.0 (16)
Lewisham 6.5 (20), 4.3 (13)
Tamworth 6.5 (5), 6.5 (5)
Sunderland 6.5 (18), 4.7 (13)
Harborough 6.4 (6), 3.2 (3)
Tewkesbury 6.3 (6), 2.1 (2)
Wyre 6.2 (7), 5.4 (6)
Dudley 6.2 (20), 2.2 (7)
Dartford 6.2 (7), 7.1 (8)
Huntingdonshire 6.2 (11), 7.9 (14)
North Warwickshire 6.1 (4), 6.1 (4)
Epping Forest 6.1 (8), 6.1 (8)
St Albans 6.1 (9), 5.4 (8)
Nottingham 6.0 (20), 6.0 (20)
Enfield 6.0 (20), 6.3 (21)
Worcester 5.9 (6), 4.0 (4)
Fenland 5.9 (6), 4.9 (5)
Elmbridge 5.8 (8), 3.7 (5)
Bristol 5.8 (27), 2.4 (11)
Islington 5.8 (14), 4.1 (10)
Thurrock 5.7 (10), 1.7 (3)
Cheshire East 5.7 (22), 8.6 (33)
South Bucks 5.7 (4), 8.6 (6)
Boston 5.7 (4), 1.4 (1)
Bexley 5.6 (14), 1.6 (4)
Gravesham 5.6 (6), 10.3 (11)
Hambleton 5.5 (5), 12.0 (11)
Babergh 5.4 (5), 4.3 (4)
West Oxfordshire 5.4 (6), 6.3 (7)
Ryedale 5.4 (3), 1.8 (1)
South Ribble 5.4 (6), 14.4 (16)
Reigate and Banstead 5.4 (8), 8.1 (12)
Hartlepool 5.3 (5), 8.5 (8)
South Tyneside 5.3 (8), 1.3 (2)
Tonbridge and Malling 5.3 (7), 3.0 (4)
York 5.2 (11), 1.9 (4)
Rother 5.2 (5), 1.0 (1)
Brentwood 5.2 (4), 2.6 (2)
Dacorum 5.2 (8), 5.2 (8)
Wycombe 5.2 (9), 5.7 (10)
Doncaster 5.1 (16), 2.2 (7)
Harrogate 5.0 (8), 5.0 (8)
Gateshead 4.9 (10), 5.9 (12)
Wirral 4.9 (16), 5.9 (19)
South Kesteven 4.9 (7), 8.4 (12)
Lambeth 4.9 (16), 11.3 (37)
Warwick 4.9 (7), 1.4 (2)
Central Bedfordshire 4.9 (14), 6.2 (18)
North West Leicestershire 4.8 (5), 3.9 (4)
Redditch 4.7 (4), 1.2 (1)
East Hertfordshire 4.7 (7), 0.7 (1)
Cheshire West and Chester 4.7 (16), 6.7 (23)
Bedford 4.6 (8), 17.3 (30)
Ashford 4.6 (6), 3.1 (4)
Greenwich 4.5 (13), 4.5 (13)
Barrow-in-Furness 4.5 (3), 1.5 (1)
West Suffolk 4.5 (8), 3.9 (7)
East Cambridgeshire 4.5 (4), 1.1 (1)
Vale of White Horse 4.4 (6), 8.1 (11)
Erewash 4.3 (5), 5.2 (6)
Shropshire 4.3 (14), 3.1 (10)
Mendip 4.3 (5), 3.5 (4)
Havering 4.2 (11), 9.6 (25)
Rushmoor 4.2 (4), 4.2 (4)
West Lindsey 4.2 (4), 4.2 (4)
Hart 4.1 (4), 3.1 (3)
Lancaster 4.1 (6), 4.1 (6)
Aylesbury Vale 4.0 (8), 4.5 (9)
Spelthorne 4.0 (4), 2.0 (2)
Tower Hamlets 4.0 (13), 6.8 (22)
Windsor and Maidenhead 4.0 (6), 5.9 (9)
Ashfield 3.9 (5), 3.9 (5)
Wychavon 3.9 (5), 7.0 (9)
Stratford-on-Avon 3.8 (5), 0.8 (1)
Broadland 3.8 (5), 4.6 (6)
Lichfield 3.8 (4), 3.8 (4)
Wealden 3.7 (6), 1.9 (3)
Ipswich 3.7 (5), 1.5 (2)
Stafford 3.6 (5), 6.6 (9)
Hinckley and Bosworth 3.5 (4), 14.1 (16)
Isle of Wight 3.5 (5), 0.0 (0)
South Gloucestershire 3.5 (10), 2.8 (8)
Stevenage 3.4 (3), 2.3 (2)
Croydon 3.4 (13), 3.1 (12)
Runnymede 3.4 (3), 5.6 (5)
Castle Point 3.3 (3), 5.5 (5)
Braintree 3.3 (5), 3.3 (5)
East Hampshire 3.3 (4), 1.6 (2)
Welwyn Hatfield 3.3 (4), 8.1 (10)
Somerset West and Taunton 3.2 (5), 1.9 (3)
Three Rivers 3.2 (3), 6.4 (6)
South Northamptonshire 3.2 (3), 3.2 (3)
Dorset 3.2 (12), 1.6 (6)
Amber Valley 3.1 (4), 1.6 (2)
Adur 3.1 (2), 0.0 (0)
Northumberland 3.1 (10), 1.6 (5)
Newcastle-under-Lyme 3.1 (4), 4.6 (6)
Exeter 3.0 (4), 1.5 (2)
North Hertfordshire 3.0 (4), 2.2 (3)
Eastleigh 3.0 (4), 1.5 (2)
Cannock Chase 3.0 (3), 4.0 (4)
East Riding of Yorkshire 2.9 (10), 0.9 (3)
Merton 2.9 (6), 6.8 (14)
Eastbourne 2.9 (3), 4.8 (5)
Mid Suffolk 2.9 (3), 1.9 (2)
Breckland 2.9 (4), 3.6 (5)
County Durham 2.8 (15), 2.1 (11)
Horsham 2.8 (4), 3.5 (5)
Southampton 2.8 (7), 3.6 (9)
Brighton and Hove 2.8 (8), 2.8 (8)
Southend-on-Sea 2.7 (5), 1.6 (3)
Tendring 2.7 (4), 5.5 (8)
South Staffordshire 2.7 (3), 8.0 (9)
Mid Sussex 2.6 (4), 2.0 (3)
Broxtowe 2.6 (3), 0.9 (1)
Gedling 2.5 (3), 1.7 (2)
Tunbridge Wells 2.5 (3), 6.7 (8)
Stroud 2.5 (3), 3.3 (4)
Sevenoaks 2.5 (3), 2.5 (3)
Bolsover 2.5 (2), 3.7 (3)
Epsom and Ewell 2.5 (2), 1.2 (1)
Sedgemoor 2.4 (3), 0.8 (1)
Wiltshire 2.4 (12), 5.8 (29)
Gosport 2.4 (2), 3.5 (3)
Daventry 2.3 (2), 7.0 (6)
Portsmouth 2.3 (5), 2.8 (6)
South Hams 2.3 (2), 1.1 (1)
Harlow 2.3 (2), 5.7 (5)
Plymouth 2.3 (6), 1.5 (4)
Cornwall and Isles of Scilly 2.3 (13), 2.4 (14)
Chelmsford 2.2 (4), 6.2 (11)
Cotswold 2.2 (2), 3.3 (3)
New Forest 2.2 (4), 1.7 (3)
Selby 2.2 (2), 2.2 (2)
Norwich 2.1 (3), 2.8 (4)
East Northamptonshire 2.1 (2), 22.2 (21)
Thanet 2.1 (3), 4.9 (7)
South Oxfordshire 2.1 (3), 5.6 (8)
Herefordshire 2.1 (4), 7.8 (15)
Staffordshire Moorlands 2.0 (2), 5.1 (5)
Great Yarmouth 2.0 (2), 15.1 (15)
Sutton 1.9 (4), 3.4 (7)
Hull 1.9 (5), 1.9 (5)
West Berkshire 1.9 (3), 3.8 (6)
South Cambridgeshire 1.9 (3), 3.1 (5)
Darlington 1.9 (2), 4.7 (5)
Arun 1.9 (3), 3.1 (5)
North Somerset 1.9 (4), 3.7 (8)
Scarborough 1.8 (2), 0.9 (1)
Mansfield 1.8 (2), 2.7 (3)
Worthing 1.8 (2), 2.7 (3)
West Devon 1.8 (1), 3.6 (2)
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 1.8 (7), 2.0 (8)
Wokingham 1.8 (3), 2.3 (4)
Maidstone 1.7 (3), 4.7 (8)
Fareham 1.7 (2), 0.0 (0)
Cheltenham 1.7 (2), 0.9 (1)
North Kesteven 1.7 (2), 1.7 (2)
Rushcliffe 1.7 (2), 3.4 (4)
Bracknell Forest 1.6 (2), 1.6 (2)
Havant 1.6 (2), 2.4 (3)
Maldon 1.5 (1), 3.1 (2)
Medway 1.4 (4), 3.2 (9)
South Norfolk 1.4 (2), 0.7 (1)
East Lindsey 1.4 (2), 2.1 (3)
East Devon 1.4 (2), 4.1 (6)
Malvern Hills 1.3 (1), 0.0 (0)
North East Lincolnshire 1.3 (2), 2.5 (4)
Mid Devon 1.2 (1), 1.2 (1)
Canterbury 1.2 (2), 2.4 (4)
North Lincolnshire 1.2 (2), 1.7 (3)
Forest of Dean 1.2 (1), 0.0 (0)
Mole Valley 1.1 (1), 1.1 (1)
Uttlesford 1.1 (1), 2.2 (2)
Basildon 1.1 (2), 3.2 (6)
South Holland 1.1 (1), 3.2 (3)
Broxbourne 1.0 (1), 4.1 (4)
Colchester 1.0 (2), 1.5 (3)
Stockton-on-Tees 1.0 (2), 6.6 (13)
North Norfolk 1.0 (1), 1.0 (1)
Crawley 0.9 (1), 2.7 (3)
East Suffolk 0.8 (2), 1.6 (4)
Test Valley 0.8 (1), 0.8 (1)
Waverley 0.8 (1), 1.6 (2)
Torbay 0.7 (1), 1.5 (2)
Redcar and Cleveland 0.7 (1), 3.6 (5)
Swale 0.7 (1), 7.3 (11)
King’s Lynn and West Norfolk 0.7 (1), 4.0 (6)
South Somerset 0.6 (1), 1.2 (2)
Basingstoke and Deane 0.6 (1), 1.7 (3)
Bath and North East Somerset 0.5 (1), 4.7 (9)
Derbyshire Dales 0.0 (0), 6.9 (5)
Tandridge 0.0 (0), 3.4 (3)
Winchester 0.0 (0), 3.2 (4)
Torridge 0.0 (0), 2.9 (2)
Hastings 0.0 (0), 2.2 (2)
Chichester 0.0 (0), 1.7 (2)
Rochford 0.0 (0), 1.1 (1)
North Devon 0.0 (0), 0.0 (0)
Teignbridge 0.0 (0), 0.0 (0)
Wyre Forest 0.0 (0), 0.0 (0)

 

[adc82140]

Given that the general consensus amongst senior doctors is that the time from infection to being seriously unwell is on average 15 days, with some outliers at 20 days, I would be expecting to see the amount of people on hospital and on ventilators to be seriously peaking on the North West around now, with the early signs of a death rate peak. This obviously isn't happening. I'd therefore like to know how they are able to justify these restrictions still in the NW.