Pillar Two

[CarlaH]

So now I feel a right numpty.

Have been keeping my eyes on the daily figures and am suddenly realising that what I have been looking at are only hospital cases.

I had no idea what pillar one and pillar two are but it seems that pillar one is hospital/healthcare settings and pillar two are cases actually out in the community.

In other words people I might encounter while out and about.

I believe that the pillar two figures aren't available so we have no way of establishing our actual risk.

Could somebody tell me I am wrong because I was just starting to feel optimistic as cases and deaths appeared to have reduced considerably.

The pillar 2 positive test figures are on the gov uk site underneath the overall total numbers.

The figure Boris etc used to announce is the total of pillar 1 and 2.

Local pillar 2 numbers need to be made available to the public ASAP.

Have just found out that we are in one of the over 30 areas at risk of a second lockdown ‘within days’.

From the govt data? No it’s not available to me, so I found out from Sky news.

I want to know local level risk so I can make decisions like whether to visit shielding relatives.

The figure of both pillar 1 and 2 testing is included in the daily total, but the pillar 2 testing isn't available on the regional breakdowns. Showing really and they need to get this sorted quickly so people are able to risk assess appropiately.

If the information is not available how do the media have it?

Pillar 2 figures were always included in country-wide breakdowns, so if those are the numbers you were checking then it's no difference.

You can find numbers for your local area including pillar 1 and pillar 2 in the latest surveillance report here:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports.

NHS England do a weekly breakdown of new cases per 100000 of population in each region. It is from both pillars but it will give a pretty good idea of where is low and high. It's less than 20 in most cases ( per 100000)

@lumene

That Sky news list - and the map/list circulating on bbc, guardian, etc - is extremely misleading.

For a start, it's still ONLY PILLAR ONE. It is NOT using the Pillar 2 data.

It is also based on % growth, not absolute numbers. So Gloucestershire is at place 4, for example, having gone from ONE to three cases. At tiny levels of infection, any change makes a big % difference, but does anyone really believe they are going to lock down Gloucester based on 3 cases? Or Wiltshire on 4??

This is the location based infection rates per/100,000, using pillar one and two. Makes it clear where the issues are, and it's not the places on that list.

That map is verging on blatant lies, and it's going to cause panic where none is needed.

The pillar 2 data by ULTA has only been published to the public in the last week. The media for some unknown reason seem to be confusing 2 things - the scandal of not having the data, but then publishing maps based on the old data.

My area is on the list that's been put out in the press as "likely for next local lockdown". The number of local cases is generally very low but we've had a recent single cluster of infection (identified and isolated quickly) which makes the percentage increase look horrific. Doesn't make the area any more likely for a local lockdown. Don't believe all you read in newspapers.

It is right that as we move to phase of local lockdown people can see the risk in the area. It wasn’t so important before because the lockdown measures were national and strict.

National data has always been available totalling both pillars. The local data being published by newspapers states exactly what it is, pillar one only. Our newspapers did not pay attention to this. Nor did people throwing data, not intelligence, around social media. That’s their bad.

The government has also explained its not going to release data that has not been validated following earlier criticism that the published data was unreliable. Presumably it took time to get to this point but it is now in place. In the meantime the unvalidated data was shared on a limited basis with people who need to know.

If you were following the national rules you didn’t need to know the local figures for infection. It didn’t change the guidance on how to behave. You should be assuming anyone you meet and spend time with could have the virus. It’s like wearing a condom.

Well I just check my own postcode each day so countrywide figures are no use to me.

I want to know how many cases are circulating in my area as it will help me decide whether to go out to shops and the like.

I think this information should be transparent and easily available to the general public.

It is the rate per 100,000 that's important. The daily dashboard gives the number and the rate for each unitary authority along with England and uk.
I cant link on my phone but its available along with a weekly infographic with breakdowns of numbers and deaths by gender etc

You shouldn't change your actions to suit the perceived risk determined by you and whatever figures you find.
For example if you are getting the bus you need a face covering whether there are 2 or 200 cases in your postcode.
People travel so postcodes will only tell you so much
Plus if everyone changed the rules themselves (as some are) your low cases will soon be higher

OP, you should have only been doing essential shopping up till very recently. Local data would not have made any difference in that case.

You were using “data” and making your own risk assessment without actually reading what the data was at source. This is your folly.

Nadine Dorries MP answering a query from Stella Creasy MP.

"The contract with Deloitte doesn’t require the company to report positive cases to PHE & local authorities."

According to ITV website there are 4.7 million test results (positive, negative, inconclusive) that have no locality or demographic tagging
and have NOT been passed to public health officials

Government announcements are based on deliberate lies

The public should have easily accessible transparent data available to all including up- to- date local infections.

Do other European countries expect its citizens to conduct complicated searches to find out this information?

I am not going out at all apart from a walk.

What I need to know is what risk I am taking if I decide to venture out.

Wearing a mask doesn't protect me and it's clear from reading multiple threads on here that a lot of people don't want to wear a mask and won't do so if they can avoid it.

So unless I want to stay behind closed doors for ever I could really do with having some idea how good or bad things are in my local area.

My daily look at the figures lead to me thinking that things were pretty good here but as I'm not actually planning to go to the hospital unless I can avoid it the figures of people in hospital and other medical settings really doesn't help me to make a decision.

@listeningquietly that would mean all the tests we have done then , seems a lot of misinfornation in media

Meant over half the tests we have done

@carlaH but people can freely travel anyway so even if numbers are lower in your area , you don't know who is visiting and where from
Surely we all go out assuming anyone could have the virus and follow all the rules and guidance we can to limit getting it

@UrbanDox i amnot sure other european countries have access to even half the data we do , they all report differently

struggling
Stella Creasy has confirmed in the House that the Delloitte contract DOES NOT report back to local authorities or health authorities

we have NO IDEA how many test results there have been in what area / result

Even worse then