New lockdown in England, including school closures, announced by Johnson, 4/1/21

[Nicholas Lewis]

It could very well be. It does seem to be the ex mining areas of Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and South Yorkshire where infection levels have remained fairly static at a high level for weeks. Most of these ex miners will all be aged 70+ and many have underlying respiratory issues. I heard it mentioned tonight on BBC East Midlands Today concerning high levels in the Mansfield area and I hadn’t heard it mentioned before.

Seems obvious area of concern now its been mentioned that you would have thought they would have bumped them up the list for early vaccination.

 

[brad465]

It certainly looks like things are starting to head in the right direction, although I remain unconvinced that the actual daily cases have halved in a week.

Yes they probably haven't halved, but the ZOE study thinks they're falling rapidly (down 250,000 active infections in 14 days) and are already below the peak in the November lockdown according to their estimates:

Latest Daily UK COVID-19 Data: Vaccines, Cases, Trends | ZOE

COVID infection & vaccination rates in the UK today, based on public data and reports from millions of users of the ZOE Health Study app

covid.joinzoe.com

 

[ChrisC]

Seems obvious area of concern now its been mentioned that you would have thought they would have bumped them up the list for early vaccination.

It’s probably the current colder winter weather that has only recently made this a concern. Many of the older ex miners in the area always suffer from chest infections and breathing difficulties during the winter. Catching Covid will be a much greater risk to them. Most of these areas of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire had relatively low hospital admission and death levels during the first lockdown and right through the summer. Also, time flies and it’s a long time now since all the mines closed, and most of these men will now be over 70 and will be high up the vaccination list anyway.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

The number of people who currently have the virus and the number of admissions to hospital is certainly falling. As you point out this is particularly so in London and the South East where numbers are now falling quite rapidly. Over much of the rest of England numbers are also falling but in many areas at a much slower rate.

There are, however, still a few areas where the number of people testing positive is not falling and has for some reason remained at the same fairly high level for weeks. This certainly seems to be the case around parts of Nottinghamshire, Leicestershire, Derbyshire and South and West Yorkshire. There are even a few parts of these areas where numbers are slowly rising again, including Leicester which has been in lockdown for months. Kings Mill Hospital near Mansfield is almost full to capacity and not expecting peak levels to be reached until sometime next month. It was suggested that underlying health issues among ex miners could be a reason for current high hospital admission levels in these areas.

Great news that levels seem to be falling quickly in some areas and hopefully some restrictions can soon be lifted, but perhaps it will initially be on a regional basis if infection levels remain high in some areas.

I have noted for some time that there are certain locations where the case rates have never dropped particularly low in comparison to the rest of the country. This includes Bradford and parts of West Yorkshire, Blackburn and parts of Lancashire, Leicester, Oldham and parts of Greater Manchester to name a few. These have always been comparatively high (with the exception of West Yorkshire which never experienced the December peak in the same way as the rest of the country, but nor are their figures dropping as quickly as other places now, in fact some areas such as Bradford have started increasing again) compared to everywhere else.

I have always assumed it is caused by a number of factors: High proportion of minority ethnic communities; high proportion of high density housing; a higher than average number of multi generational households; high dependency on public transport, taxis or car sharing and a higher dependency on front line or manual work that cannot be done from home. My local council (Bradford) has also highlighted language as barrier, in so far as many women in the ethnic communities do not speak English.

These factors combined have been the reason these areas have, in my view, suffered from continually high infection rates.

As someone else posted recently, this also means these areas have suffered local restrictions / higher tiers the longest already (mainly to pretty minimal effect to be honest) and are likely to go back in to and remain in higher tiers for longer when the current lockdown is relaxed. This will certainly not aid compliance as people in the affected areas have suffered these restrictions longer than anyone else and are thoroughly fed up. This means they are more likely to bend or ignore the rules which ultimately means the rates remain high so they continue to suffer restrictions longer than anywhere else and so the cycle repeats.

The resentment is often felt most strongly in the outlying more rural parts of the districts which don't necessarily have the same issues as the urban centres and hence don't have such high case rates in general.

 

[Philip]

I have noted for some time that there are certain locations where the case rates have never dropped particularly low in comparison to the rest of the country. This includes Bradford and parts of West Yorkshire, Blackburn and parts of Lancashire, Leicester, Oldham and parts of Greater Manchester to name a few. These have always been comparatively high (with the exception of West Yorkshire which never experienced the December peak in the same way as the rest of the country, but nor are their figures dropping as quickly as other places now, in fact some areas such as Bradford have started increasing again) compared to everywhere else.

I have always assumed it is caused by a number of factors: High proportion of minority ethnic communities; high proportion of high density housing; a higher than average number of multi generational households; high dependency on public transport, taxis or car sharing and a higher dependency on front line or manual work that cannot be done from home. My local council (Bradford) has also highlighted language as barrier, in so far as many women in the ethnic communities do not speak English.

These factors combined have been the reason these areas have, in my view, suffered from continually high infection rates.

As someone else posted recently, this also means these areas have suffered local restrictions / higher tiers the longest already (mainly to pretty minimal effect to be honest) and are likely to go back in to and remain in higher tiers for longer when the current lockdown is relaxed. This will certainly not aid compliance as people in the affected areas have suffered these restrictions longer than anyone else and are thoroughly fed up. This means they are more likely to bend or ignore the rules which ultimately means the rates remain high so they continue to suffer restrictions longer than anywhere else and so the cycle repeats.

The resentment is often felt most strongly in the outlying more rural parts of the districts which don't necessarily have the same issues as the urban centres and hence don't have such high case rates in general.

This isn't really a problem anymore because of the vaccination progress; taking the North West as one of the regions you mention; about 900,000 vaccines have been given in this region which is about 12% of the population. By the time restrictions are reviewed many of the 'vulnerable' will have had the vaccine and the higher infection rates will mean increased natural immunity, so pressure eased on hospitals even if case numbers aren't reducing much.

Besides, the Liverpool region also falls into the category of area you're describing above, and their infection rates are dropping off at a similar level to those in London/SE. The rates in Sheffield and other parts of Yorkshire are declining slowly, but then they already have currently some of the lowest infection rates in the country.

 

[Bantamzen]

I have noted for some time that there are certain locations where the case rates have never dropped particularly low in comparison to the rest of the country. This includes Bradford and parts of West Yorkshire, Blackburn and parts of Lancashire, Leicester, Oldham and parts of Greater Manchester to name a few. These have always been comparatively high (with the exception of West Yorkshire which never experienced the December peak in the same way as the rest of the country, but nor are their figures dropping as quickly as other places now, in fact some areas such as Bradford have started increasing again) compared to everywhere else.

I have always assumed it is caused by a number of factors: High proportion of minority ethnic communities; high proportion of high density housing; a higher than average number of multi generational households; high dependency on public transport, taxis or car sharing and a higher dependency on front line or manual work that cannot be done from home. My local council (Bradford) has also highlighted language as barrier, in so far as many women in the ethnic communities do not speak English.

These factors combined have been the reason these areas have, in my view, suffered from continually high infection rates.

As someone else posted recently, this also means these areas have suffered local restrictions / higher tiers the longest already (mainly to pretty minimal effect to be honest) and are likely to go back in to and remain in higher tiers for longer when the current lockdown is relaxed. This will certainly not aid compliance as people in the affected areas have suffered these restrictions longer than anyone else and are thoroughly fed up. This means they are more likely to bend or ignore the rules which ultimately means the rates remain high so they continue to suffer restrictions longer than anywhere else and so the cycle repeats.

The resentment is often felt most strongly in the outlying more rural parts of the districts which don't necessarily have the same issues as the urban centres and hence don't have such high case rates in general.

Actually Bradford dropped way below the national average for a while, and even though rates have risen Bradford is still below the national average. I haven't checked other areas but you might want to check your data before making such assumptions.

 

[northernchris]

Presumably that might also account for high numbers in places like the Rhondda?

It seems to be the case, Sky were reporting yesterday that Rhonnda has the worst Covid death rate in the UK, with part of that being attributed to the fallout from the mines

COVID-19: Living in the UK's deadliest place for coronavirus | UK News | Sky News

Dr Dai Samuel, a consultant at the Royal Glamorgan Hospital in Rhondda Cynon Taf, says the borough faced a "perfect storm" of high levels of deprivation and health problems in tight-knit communities before the pandemic took hold.

"I think some of our valleys were in dire straits before COVID hit... that's only been exacerbated a hundred fold," he says.

"You've got very densely populated areas, which are the fallout from the old coalfields.

"You had a significant burden of health (issues) before COVID - high levels of obesity, high levels of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, alcohol excess, substance misuse - all of which play into additional risk if you get COVID.

"And yes, there's undoubtedly been an aspect, probably, of not everyone following the rules."

Actually Bradford dropped way below the national average for a while, and even though rates have risen Bradford is still below the national average. I haven't checked other areas but you might want to check your data before making such assumptions.

Yes, West Yorkshire seems to be in a better situation now than autumn when it had amongst the highest infection rates in the country. I think being placed in Tier 3 immediately after the November lockdown helped with this, although as others have commented some places are starting to see infections rates creep up. I was checking my local authority data yesterday (Leeds) and whilst the number of confirmed cases has gone down over the last week the infection rate has increased, so not sure what's going on there!

 

[Bantamzen]

It seems to be the case, Sky were reporting yesterday that Rhonnda has the worst Covid death rate in the UK, with part of that being attributed to the fallout from the mines

COVID-19: Living in the UK's deadliest place for coronavirus | UK News | Sky News




Yes, West Yorkshire seems to be in a better situation now than autumn when it had amongst the highest infection rates in the country. I think being placed in Tier 3 immediately after the November lockdown helped with this, although as others have commented some places are starting to see infections rates creep up. I was checking my local authority data yesterday (Leeds) and whilst the number of confirmed cases has gone down over the last week the infection rate has increased, so not sure what's going on there!

Its also worth noting that places like Bradford were put under the microscope with very intensive testing that has been going on for months. From a walk-in city centre testing site up to testers going door-to-door, its no surprise just how many cases were found.

 

[notlob.divad]

Covid hitting mining areas and ex mining areas hard is not some new revelation or discovery. There is a multitue of reasons for this, from the housing stock and density, the higher levels of deprevation, ongoing health issues related to the miners themselves, historic lower levels of air quality meaning the whole community generally has higher levels of pre-existing conditions.

I was studying this at least back in June, when there were continuing high levels of outbreak in the Polish mining areas around Katowice, whilst much of the rest of Poland was back to lower numbers. Katowice also has some of the worst air quality in Poland It even briefly made the BBC news at the time, when one specific mine was the focus of attention. If those at the heart of the UK government really haven't learnt this lesson by now, their really is no hope.

Coronavirus: Hundreds of Polish infections linked to mine

A single coal mine in southern Poland accounted for 38% of all new infections on Sunday.

www.bbc.com

 

[hwl]

Another outlier is Devon where case rates/100k are the lowest in England in part helped by it being rural im sure but even Exeter City is well inside bottom quartile or is it that the new Kent variant hasn't got to S.West or has it virulence declined?

It appears that the new variant only has only really got into few (big e.g. Bristol) places in the South West. The R value is though to be as low as 0.4 in areas where it hasn't really reached in the SW

 

[WelshBluebird]

Presumably that might also account for high numbers in places like the Rhondda?

It seems to be the case, Sky were reporting yesterday that Rhonnda has the worst Covid death rate in the UK, with part of that being attributed to the fallout from the mines

COVID-19: Living in the UK's deadliest place for coronavirus | UK News | Sky News

I can't speak for the places in England, but certainly can speak for the Rhondda as I grew up there and my parents still live there.

I certainly think the fact the area is an ex-mining area has a lot to do with it, but I am not so convinced it is just because of the health of people who used to be miners.
As the Sky News article suggests, the health of the general population of the area can be pretty low and we often come out pretty poorly when it comes to various measures of both health and deprivation.

And then you have decades of neglect to the area which has led to local hospital provision being downgraded and has led to the employment situation in the local area, amongst other issues.

In terms of hospitals - it has got so bad that people like my parents who don't drive have a 90 minute to 2 hour journey by two buses to get to the local major hospital now, whereas in the past when I was growing up it was a 15 minute bus ride (that one has been downgraded to just a minor hospital). I am sure some places in rural areas are just as bad or worse, but I'm not sure many places have had such a downgrade in recent years.

And in terms of employment - lot of the work is either manual work that cannot be done from home (and so workplaces have been open throughout all of this) or requires a commute to towns or cities slightly further away (and so requiring people to travel).

Then there's also the geography of the area to consider and how the towns and villages are intertwined. It is very common for someone for people to travel between the different towns and villages for various things - as an example if my mother was doing a weekly food shop, had a GP appointment and needed to go to the post office - that would involve a visit to 3 differently villages in the immediate area. And of course you have family and relatives who are often scattered amongst the nearby villages etc.

And one last thing that I have noticed more from friends who still live back there is I suspect a general distrust of government / authority which has led to a lot of people believing conspiracy theories or just ignoring government advice.

Basically - there are quite a lot of things that have probably come together to make the situation what it is.

 

[Yew]

This is something which really needed addressing last March, no one should be financially worse off for doing the right thing

Why go for sensible, cost-effective, and reasonable measures, when you can go for damaging, expensive and draconian ones?

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not convinced about going into the tier system. Having been stuck in a pointless and ill conceived national lockdown with comparatively low infection rates, it would be typical if, just as London is on a downward trend ant the country opens up, we have an uptick and be forced back into tier 4 - lockdown in all but name.

Also all it does is get the lockdown loonies foaming at the mouth when people have the temerity to cross the county border.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Johnson announcing in the house presently that there will be no relaxation of lockdown until Monday 8th March at the earliest, which is when they hope to initiate a phased return of schools.

 

[duncanp]

I'm not convinced about going into the tier system. Having been stuck in a pointless and ill conceived national lockdown with comparatively low infection rates, it would be typical if, just as London is on a downward trend ant the country opens up, we have an uptick and be forced back into tier 4 - lockdown in all but name.

Also all it does is get the lockdown loonies foaming at the mouth when people have the temerity to cross the county border.

Personally I don't think we will go into a tier system when the lockdown is released, or if we do, then the whole country will move down the tiers at the same time.

Having different restrictions in different parts of the country will just cause resentment in those area under tighter restrictions, and will lead to people making unecessary journeys.

Boris said just now that they will have the data to make an informed decision about easing the lockdown by the middle of February.

I think a key statistic will be the extent to which the vaccine inhibits transmission of the virus. The more the vaccine suppresses virus transmission, the easier it will be to ease lockdown sooner rather than later.

 

[DB]

Johnson announcing in the house presently that there will be no relaxation of lockdown until Monday 8th March at the earliest, which is when they hope to initiate a phased return of schools.

Another bloody month!

Presumably the politicians are ignoring the lessening compliance - in particular as regards working from home. I'm sure this is happening - heading to work on the train yesterday it was quite noticeable looking at the main roads that traffic up and down the Aire valley is increasing again, and the centre of Leeds was fairly busy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2021 ==

I think a key statistic will be the extent to which the vaccine inhibits transmission of the virus. The more the vaccine suppresses virus transmission, the easier it will be to ease lockdown sooner rather than later.

But what if the vaccine doesn't suppress it as much as hoped? There aren't any other options now so they need to be getting rid of the restrictions irrespective of how effective that is.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Actually Bradford dropped way below the national average for a while, and even though rates have risen Bradford is still below the national average. I haven't checked other areas but you might want to check your data before making such assumptions.

I did note that by commenting that West Yorkshire never really saw the December peak that lots of the rest of the country saw. During that period Bradford and most of West Yorkshire did drop well below the national average, and even the regional average. At some point they were nearly the lowest in the country.

But at the moment the figures are not really dropping (in fact Bradford is rising (up 9.6% in the past 7 days)) and other areas which overtook West Yorkshire are beginning to drop below it again.

The risk therefore is that whilst West Yorkshire avoided the worst of the December peak, it is not now falling like the vast majority of the rest of the country and - if the Government are still going to be wedded to the idea of regional tiers and relax restrictions on a regional basis - it is likely based on past experience that it will end up being higher than the national average and being in the top tiers and the last to get relaxed.

Example data from gov.uk, 7 day case rate per 100,000:

4th January - England 680.4 Bradford 286.6
21st January - England 403.9 Bradford 311.2

 

[johntea]

Another 5pm briefing with Boris assisted by Prof Gloom and Sir Doom

 

[takno]

I did note that by commenting that West Yorkshire never really saw the December peak that lots of the rest of the country saw. During that period Bradford and most of West Yorkshire did drop well below the national average, and even the regional average. At some point they were nearly the lowest in the country.

But at the moment the figures are not really dropping (in fact Bradford is rising (up 9.6% in the past 7 days)) and other areas which overtook West Yorkshire are beginning to drop below it again.

The risk therefore is that whilst West Yorkshire avoided the worst of the December peak, it is not now falling like the vast majority of the rest of the country and - if the Government are still going to be wedded to the idea of regional tiers and relax restrictions on a regional basis - it is likely based on past experience that it will end up being higher than the national average and being in the top tiers and the last to get relaxed.

Example data from gov.uk, 7 day case rate per 100,000:

4th January - England 680.4 Bradford 286.6
21st January - England 403.9 Bradford 311.2

So Bradford is at a reasonably low level and showing no statistically significant change, while England is getting better but is still significantly above it. A 10% change over a week in a single local authority area is likely to be random noise - everybody reading too much into random noise is what's been messing us all up all year.

 

[duncanp]

But what if the vaccine doesn't suppress it as much as hoped? There aren't any other options now so they need to be getting rid of the restrictions irrespective of how effective that is.

I think it is most unlikely that the vaccine will not suppress transmission at all.

After all, it has been shown to be effective in fighting the infection, which presumably means that any viral load passed on by someone who is infected after being vaccinated is less than it otherwise would be.

If the extent to which transmission is suppresed is not as much as hoped for, then I think that will affect the timing of the easing of lockdown, plus what measures remain in place afterwards.

For example, if the vaccine is really effective at stopping transmission, you may find that non essential shops and pubs can reopen on the same date. It could also mean that more household mixing is allowed, and mask wearing is no longer mandatory.

But you are right in that we cannot carry on with the current set of restrictions for ever just because the data isn't quite as good as we had hoped for.

We all have to learn to live with COVID-19 on a long term basis, and this means that we must be able to carry on the vast majority of our daily activities as normal.

 

[yorksrob]

Another bloody month!

Presumably the politicians are ignoring the lessening compliance - in particular as regards working from home. I'm sure this is happening - heading to work on the train yesterday it was quite noticeable looking at the main roads that traffic up and down the Aire valley is increasing again, and the centre of Leeds was fairly busy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2021 ==



But what if the vaccine doesn't suppress it as much as hoped? There aren't any other options now so they need to be getting rid of the restrictions irrespective of how effective that is.

Indeed, anyone would have thought from our politicians that people who either aren't, or don't have school children, don't exist.

No wonder people aren't listening to them anymore.

It's simply not good enough to have lockdown as the default position.

 

[brad465]

Indeed, anyone would have thought from our politicians that people who either aren't, or don't have school children, don't exist.

No wonder people aren't listening to them anymore.

This was swings and roundabouts for me, I agree they need to reopen much earlier, but at least the prospect of before Easter reopening currently exists, after speculation they'd definitely wait until after.

 

[py_megapixel]

I'm as unsurprised by this as I am frustrated...

I didn't think for a moment that schools would reopen in February, and I am highly sceptical of the March reopening date.

 

[DB]

I'm as unsurprised by this as I am frustrated...

I didn't think for a moment that schools would reopen in February, and I am highly sceptical of the March reopening date.

I they don't reopen things in March, just watch what happens when the weather warms up - don't think there's any doubt that there will be very considerable non-compliance.

 

[Class 33]

Another 5pm briefing with Boris assisted by Prof Gloom and Sir Doom

Thought that meant Whitty and Vallance. But I see it's actually Van Tam and Vallance.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2021 ==

Disappointed to hear today that he's already made the decision to extend the lockdown until at least 8th March! I thought by 15th February when the review was due to take place, that all the cases/healthcare/deaths stats would be far better by then, and a chance that the lockdown could at least be eased a bit. But apparantly not, he's already made the decision to extend it again!

 

[DB]

Thought that meant Whitty and Vallance. But I see it's actually Van Tam and Vallance.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jan 2021 ==

Disappointed to hear today that he's already made the decision to extend the lockdown until at least 8th March! I thought by 15th February when the review was due to take place, that all the cases/healthcare/deaths stats would be far better by then, and a chance that the lockdown could at least be eased a bit. But apparantly not, he's already made the decision to extend it again!

Wonder whether he'll get any opposition over that in February if numbers are declining fast?

 

[Class 33]

Wonder whether he'll get any opposition over that in February if numbers are declining fast?

Hope both those things happen. As by 8th March this will have been a 9 week national lockdown. Absolutely crazy. Johnson set to announce a "roadmap" out of lockdown and restrictions on 22nd February. Things really will have to start moving progressively forward on a roadmap back to "The old normal". As we can't go on with this lockdown and "New normal" nonsense for too much longer now. It's wrecking the economy and the mental health of millions.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Based on a post in one of the other threads, the lockdown starting to end on the 8th March would put us basically bang on in terms of timings from the first lockdown last year - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ncing-go-on-for-in-the-uk.206084/post-4967908.

Not claiming the post is accurate - but an interesting observation, especially to those who think a 9 week lockdown is "absolutely crazy" as the above post does - it may be that depending on your opinion, but at least according to what was posted in the other thread, it does match what happened last year.

 

[yorksrob]

Based on a post in one of the other threads, the lockdown starting to end on the 8th March would put us basically bang on in terms of timings from the first lockdown last year - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ncing-go-on-for-in-the-uk.206084/post-4967908.

Not claiming the post is accurate - but an interesting observation, especially to those who think a 9 week lockdown is "absolutely crazy" as the above post does - it may be that, but at least according to what was posted in the other thread, it does match what happened last year.

Just because it's "absolutely crazy" doesn't mean we don't think the Government will try and impose it.

 

[MikeWM]

Based on a post in one of the other threads, the lockdown starting to end on the 8th March would put us basically bang on in terms of timings from the first lockdown last year - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ncing-go-on-for-in-the-uk.206084/post-4967908.

Not claiming the post is accurate - but an interesting observation, especially to those who think a 9 week lockdown is "absolutely crazy" as the above post does - it may be that depending on your opinion, but at least according to what was posted in the other thread, it does match what happened last year.

I wasn't claiming it was accurate either , just comparing like-for-like. But the explicit mention of the 8th March today does make me wonder if they're going to try to do effectively exactly the same again.

I think there is a difference between the two in the way they are approached though - this lockdown comes after 5-6 months of an almost relentless ratcheting up of restrictions. The first one by contrast was shocking but also a novelty and 'normal life' wasn't then a distant memory.