Cases by area

[EdwynCollins]

I'm very disappointed with the reporting of C-19. I would like some more in depth reporting or more from the scientific community
I was reading, Yorkshire Post I think or similar, the difference in deaths by area as a %of population
London is not the worst. The three areas were in order Barrow - in-Furness, Lancaster then South Lakes. Southern areas fared well. Plymouth was looking particularly good for a city
Do you think it's poverty? But South Lakes isn't particularly deprived. I'm interested in why some areas are worse than others
A village near me had an early outbreak which surprised me. They could all be traced to a particular social group so is it just luck

Sorry. That is a waffly post, just call me Boris

If we had accurate data, I'd see some logic in a hypothetical regional easing out of lockdown. For example, my county / council area has a population just under 800,000. Last I looked, earlier this week, confirmed cases were just over 5000, and deaths approaching 250 or so. Even if actual cases were three times that figure - mild, asymptomatic etc it suggests our area is a fairly low risk one. And tracking and tracing those who have been in contact with someone infected shouldn't be beyond the data gathering capabilities one would hope are being implemented in this scenario. Of course people would find it uncomfortable not being allowed into or even out of a specific area and one would want to avoid people coming because things we re-opened in one county and not in another if figures suggested high risks - but might this not help the economic and mental health of those in lower risk areas? I'm just musing and probably talking out of my arse to be fair, but I can't help thinking that proper testing, tracking and tracing done as soon as it became apparent there was a problem would have avoided the current extreme situation.

I would like to see limits on how far people can travel at least until tracking and tracing is underway
We missed a trick on not tracking the spread

Agreed. At the beginning of March, a friend of mine came down with what was "probably" CV19. She believes she caught it from her her pre-teen daughter who had been spending time with her father, who had been travelling abroad (they are separated). Following 111 instructions, she went to hospital, but was told that as she hadn't been exposed to anyone from a known hotspot, she wouldn't be tested. She did have a chest X-ray and was told it "could" be a chest infection, or possibly CV19 and to isolate herself for 2 weeks. She was extremely ill, though not hospital worthy. Right there, that sequence of events was all wrong and I was incensed when I found out that only those admitted to hospital were being tested, not the severely symptomatic regardless. Testing, tracking and tracing should have happened as early as February, and would have given a very clear picture of the spread. I am baffled by the whole way this has been approached in the UK. Our data will be so skewed and flawed due to people assuming their illness was CV19 without being tested, and the asymptomatic not being tested but having it that I don't think we will ever have a true picture of what has happened.