36 areas in UK at risk for lockdown ‘within days’ - are you in one?

[Lumene]

Really need to be able to access local data on risks like this instead of finding out through news outlets:

news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-bradford-and-london-boroughs-among-36-at-risk-areas-that-could-be-just-days-away-from-local-lockdowns-12018594

Not happy at all, why is govt not being transparent with data?

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

IT IS A PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS.

WHAT IS THE POINT IN TESTING IF THE COMPANY IS NOT REQUIRED TO REPORT POSITIVE TESTS TO PHE (THE BODY OVERSEEING THE CRISIS) AND THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES (THOSE WHO HAVE TO IMPLIMENT LOCAL LOCKDOWNS)?

WHY ARE THEY EVEN TESTING?

WHAT ARE THEY DOING WITH THIS DATA?

I’m in one of the areas cited. Not on @Alex50 list though.

However part of my job is to compile stats on cases. My area has one of the lowest case increases, so I am at a loss to see how it’s on the media list.

I would like to know how they’ve come up with the list.

@heyheyho

Exactly

If you did you would know the list is a pile of pish

It only takes a few cases before we have a serious spike. Careful monitoring is key, and going from no infections to even 5 or 10 is not exactly a good sign!

I posted a link to the pillar 1 + pillar 2 data further up this thread, there's no reason why any newspaper can't choose to use that on their map instead of just pillar 1, and no reason for people to keep squealing how disgraceful it is that the data isn't available WHEN THERE IS A LINK TO IT.

Once more for those who didn't manage to check their liven area's actual infection rate; download the spreadsheet that's third in the list and go to tab "Figure 9 weekly rates UTLA":
www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports

Careful monitoring is key, and going from no infections to even 5 or 10 is not exactly a good sign!

I'm more concerned that there isn't careful monitoring and that being the problem. Not a numbering from 5 to 10

Leicester spike has 90% of tests being pillar2 and therefore invisible to Public Health England who are the ones supposed to be doing the monitoring.

Look at the FT graph.

I posted a link to the pillar 1 + pillar 2 data further up this thread, there's no reason why any newspaper can't choose to use that on their map instead of just pillar 1, and no reason for people to keep squealing how disgraceful it is that the data isn't available WHEN THERE IS A LINK TO IT.

You mean the data that health officials needed weeks ago and could get cos its only just been released?

Our nearest city saw cases increase 150% yesterday... from 2, to 5. When the numbers are tiny, the % figures are very misleading.

The phrase knife edge springs instantly to mind

I live in one of the areas on the list and last I heard we have one of the lowest infection rates in London, with very little uptick since April.

I appreciate that local lockdown may happen but am sick of the media messing with people's heads with their sensationalistic crap. I've only started to feel better in the last few weeks - literally can't face the thought of another lockdown

@Micah

I’m in one of the areas cited. Not on *@Alex50* list though.

However part of my job is to compile stats on cases. My area has one of the lowest case increases, so I am at a loss to see how it’s on the media list.

I would like to know how they’ve come up with the list.

They have taken the raw number of increase in Pillar One cases week on week and calculated the percentage increase.

so an area that has gone from, say, 1 to 2 cases has a 100% increase!! and therefore we need to panic!!

It ignores Pillar 2, and sizes of relative population. It's completely meaningless.

It's extremely irresponsible reporting.

We’re not far from Bradford, also not far from Rochdale. But our actual area isn’t on the list.

[quote MRex]I posted a link to the pillar 1 + pillar 2 data further up this thread, there's no reason why any newspaper can't choose to use that on their map instead of just pillar 1, and no reason for people to keep squealing how disgraceful it is that the data isn't available WHEN THERE IS A LINK TO IT.

Once more for those who didn't manage to check their liven area's actual infection rate; download the spreadsheet that's third in the list and go to tab "Figure 9 weekly rates UTLA":
www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports[/quote]
That link makes even less sense to me @MRex.

I am in one of those 36 places at risk but the number of case per million is stageringly low. Another UTLA near by has a number of cases per millions that is about 10 times higher but isn't in the 36 areas at risk of lockdown.
So what has been making the government making those assumptions??

Gloucestershire Council tweeted in the last half an hour that there is no spike in Covid-19 cases in the county.

The area I am bordering has gone from 11 last week to 23 this week, A rise of 109% according to this map

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/rising-coronavirus-infections-in-pockets-of-uk-raise-fears-of-further-local-lockdowns

Would this include Pillar 2

As for the increase by 100% when the numbers are low, I suppose this only shows that people just don't understand statistics....

The reporting is wrong though and I would expect a journalist worth their salt to be able to see where the issue is. It's not rocket science.

@questionmarknow

That map/list IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT.

It seems to originate with the Daily Mail, who have created a scaremongering map based the % increase in Pillar 1 cases week on week. It's total nonsense as an increase from 1-2 means a 100% INCREASE , but it's not going to lead to lockdown. It's irresponsible and downright deceptive reporting.

I think this article sounds more realistic

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/01/data-reveals-coronavirus-hotspots-in-bradford-barnsley-and-rochdale

Which if it was 11 last week and 23 this week, does that imply 47 next week? I am really confused, its East Sussex by the way.

Sky News appear to have removed the list

Isn't this just Daily Mail hype? I think Leicester may have some schools and factories closed and are trying to stop all the social get togethers. Didn't we expect action to be taken where there are cluster outbreaks?

@QuestionMarkNow - the news report is incorrect, that's what the issue is. If your UTLA cases are low then your area is lower risk.

@Jenasaurus

The area I am bordering has gone from 11 last week to 23 this week, A rise of 109% according to this map

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/30/rising-coronavirus-infections-in-pockets-of-uk-raise-fears-of-further-local-lockdowns

Would this include Pillar 2

no, that map does not include Pillar 2. Your area has a weekly infection rate of 9/100,000; compared to Leicester's 140/100,000.

@ChicCroissant

Gloucestershire Council tweeted in the last half an hour that there is no spike in Covid-19 cases in the county.

I am starting to wonder if this is just some ridiculous mind game by the government to keep us at work but doing nothing else. The responsibility always seems on us to decide what parts of the government easing of lockdown we are supposed to pay attention to and which ones we should have the 'common sense' to ignore. Its never clear or straightforward, meaning if it goes wrong, it's our fault for going to see our families or going to the shops.

Sky news have changed the list to cases per 100,000 rather than %increase. The old kid was making areas such as plymouth and Wiltshire look like they were having a massive number of cases. They aren’t. In plymouth there was an increase in cases from 2 to 5 which is a 150% increase but it’s only an increase of 3!