How is this still spreading?

[Dee96]

This may sound like a rather dumb question but the whole point of lockdown was to decrease the rate of this spread. I understand for a while into the lockdown we was going to see the results of those who caught it beforehand starting to display symptons but were all 3 weeks into this now and it doesnt seem to be slowing down. Yes I know people still need to go the shops ect but given the measures they are now taking and how they are controlling how many people enter the shops I would think it's actually safer and less likely a risk to shop now rather than before when everyone was panic buying. So how come death rates and cases dont seem to be slowing, especially given theres a huge amount of undetected cases as well

[Aderyn19]

Some people are still flouting lockdown. The airports have been operating as normal, with no checks or quarantine on people coming in. Plus essential workers have no ppe so that isn't helping. I think we need tougher lockdown really.

[ohmysoul]

I think the essential worker title covers a lot more areas than we all realise.

[Horsemad]

They did say infections & deaths would continue to rise well in to lockdown, as I recall.

We have to be patient. It will level off but when exactly, isn't known for sure.

[TheCanterburyWhales]

If you are in the UK it's not really a full total lockdown, people are still going to catch it while out.
Lockdown has been what- 20 days? Someone in the beginning of lockdown who was incubating it without knowing went out and about infecting others....symptoms can be anything from 5-20+ days before showing (extreme end of things)
Many of those showing symptoms now would have been infected at the beginning of lockdown of not before.
Death rates won't peak until after infections have, and we won't know until afterwards when the curve first plateaus then goes down, that the peak has passed.
Remember too, the figures for deaths aren't in real time. The other day there were a catch up from about 5 days prior to that date.

[viccat]

Lots of people still working and catching it, and then spreading it to the people they live with. And obviously not everyone is following the rules anyway.

[ifonly4]

From the many aggitated posts on here it's clear there's quite a few who aren't sticking to the lockdown, and there are many who are still popping into the shops on a very regular basis. I read there was a survey on yougov where 20% of people who were meant to be self isolating, had at some point gone out.

[ScorpionQueen]

The building industry is still working isn't it? That's got to be a big contributing factor, especially in Somerset with so many working on Hinkley. Other areas must have similar things going on.

[Lunde]

I think that the results of other countries are showing that a proportion of those who have coronavirus have absolutely no symptoms and presumable continue to shop, exercise and go to work.

[Dee96]

@Aderyn19 I get that but were are these people going? Here in south everything is closed except supermarkets and chemists. Most main parks have been closed off. The streets arent full of people, the only cars I mainly see are lorries(workers) and ambulances. Obviously this is only one tiny area in the uk but I'm still confused as to what people could be doing out and about?

[VivaLeBeaver]

I think the lag is more than what people appreciate.

We’re very nearly 3 weeks into the lockdown. So last week infection rates should have started falling. But we don’t really track infection rates well due to poor testing. Death rates are a more accurate way of tracking. But these lag a couple of weeks behind infection. So in a week’s time id hope to see a noticeable difference in mortality figures.

[YinMnBlue]

Lots of reasons and possible reasons:

Shopping. The 2m distance thing is no guarantee of safety,, going into a shop where people have been breathing all day.

Work: so many key workers still in contact with plenty of people, at work and on transport getting to work

Idiots not understanding and /or flouting the rules and putting themselves and others at risk

The exponential rise in infection - the people infected up to 3 weeks ago will now be ill...but the people they unwittingly infected will be falling ill in even greater numbers.

Airports.

Accidental transgressions of rules - people in my local park clearly have no real understanding as to how bug a distance 2m, is. People stand on either side of a path, at a distance, having a chat, and everyone else has to stop or walk between them - why don't they stand long the path rather than across it?

Cyclists and runners leaving slipstreams of aerosolised virus particles as they breathe hard and are not always 2m apart.

Kids,, maybe asymptomatic, but touching things in shops and out and about as kids naturally do

Kids still in childcare settings for key workers.

It is a lot to stop, at this stage.

[Horsemad]

South West had quite a low number of cases (if at all, any of this data can be believed 🙄) when I last checked (about a week ago, tbf).

[viques]

Because we have a) not tested people in contact with people known to have the virus and traced contacts properly b) not required those in contact with sick people to self isolate c) not dealt well with people flouting lockdown expectations d) not provided PPE equipment for people in contact with the general public like bus drivers, shop staff etc.

Apart from that it appears that clapping at 8 o'clock on a Thursday does not provide immunity by way of virtue.

[Miranda15110]

The people dying now were infected approximately 4 weeks ago. We were still going to concerts, Cheltenham etc as the government was doing the whole Herd Immunity thing 😟

[AmIAStone]

14 day incubation period, then a 7 day mild illness before you then crash and get super sick. So 3 weeks from when you were exposed. People are still visiting family and touching their phones after touching supermarket trolleys etc. The same with petrol pumps/cash points etc. People are talking to their neighbours on coffee mornings and clearly less than 2m. People are passing each other on pavements and footpaths.

[Kokeshi123]

Because cases reduce first, then hospitalizations, then deaths. The timeline of infection means that this is simply the way it works and there is no way to speed up the process further. Demanding instant results and howling for more and more severe lockdowns when instant results are not forthcoming, will not make this process happen any faster and will only damage goodwill.

twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora/status/1249069258425995264

Most people are obeying lockdown rules. We need to keep going as we are and be patient!

[AmIAStone]

What @Miranda15110 said.

[SeriousSerendipity]

Aside from whether people are abiding by the rules, there are many, many people who have no choice but to go to work. And even with the best intentions it’s really hard to apply social distancing in the work environment.

[TheCanterburyWhales]

Also, as pp said, in comparison with other countries, I believe the UK is only testing those who present to hospital with symptoms? So lots of people who are asymptomatic going about their daily life, possibly working etc and spreading it.

[maryberrystalentlesstwin]

Yep what @Miranda15110 said.
It worries me that people assume that lockdown means infection rates / deaths should have started fall by now, when clearly if you look at the timeline that won't be the case, and will decide that lock down isn't working and will give up.

[maddiemookins16mum]

Because we are still going out. There are hundreds of thousands of people still doing jobs that still need doing (non key workers). Like me, I cannot work from home, I’m in an office (albeit only with a max of 5 other people instead of 150). If I don’t then hundreds of customers won’t get financial help at present (think HMRC/tax). It’s still a risk.

[1ForAllnAllFor1]

Because lockdown was to slow down and flatten rescind the peak.

But here is what happened. If every carrier person infects 4, the lockdown probably made it so that every person infect 2 instead.

Before lockddown there was not much testing, many people were at the beginning of symptoms still.. and the number of infected had grown to a few thousands detected and much much more than that undetected.

So while the infection rate had slowed down but since the number of actual infected cases is higher than before lockdown, even if transmission is 1 person to 2, the number is still going to grow.

What needs to happen is number or infected cases neee to decline (recoveries and deaths), as well as the lockdown measures need to be very effected so that it is indeed 1 to 1 transmission or none at all.

If the ratio of recoveries to actual cases is higher than the rate of transmission then we will see a decline


That’s my personal take/analysis

[HennyPenny4]

I think we are the most obese country in Europe, that would mean more who get it would die.

[peajotter]

Most of it is time lag and spreading within families. Breaking lockdown is a tiny impact compared to these.

Say as a typical example, someone who had a fatal case sadly caught it on 23 march, just before lockdown...

28 March- symptoms start showing (Incubation 2-14 days normally. Average about 5)

4th April. Admitted to hospital after a week of symptoms. At this point they get tested.

6th April. Test results are back, recorded as a “new case”. Move to intensive care.

10th April- death

12th April (today) shows up in death statistics after paperwork processed.

So someone who got it before lockdown could just be showing up in the death statistics now. If they gave it to a family member then they would be a week later-showing in “new cases” now and possibly dying next week.

Most of the people who died yesterday quite probably caught it before lockdown.

[JellyFishSquish]

We should expect one or two more weeks of high death toll, even with a well conducted lockdown.

It is all to do with the lag time. People who were just showing symptoms or had it but didn't know when the lockdown was announced, are possibly not even in hospital yet. And this dreadful virus takes its time killing you.

Look instead for the reduction of hospital admissions.