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?

@Bramblebear92

Sky News appear to have removed the list

do they?? HURRAH.

I was really hoping some of the press would do that. It's completely irresponsible to be publishing it.

My area is on the list

We had 0 new cases for ages, then 1 case last week and another this week.

The council and the local Director of Public Health have all given statements to say its utter nonsense and actually we’ve done really well

My area has been identified as an area who may struggle if we were to get a second wave due to the hospital size/intensive care beds/large elderly population, but it was the same way back in the beginning

I live in the borough of Richmond, which is on the list. We have 2 cases! But, as it was nil last week this is a big Percentage increase.

The figures are rubbish

I had been feeling good because my local authority has reported no new cases for 12 days in a row now. That’s taken from the lginform site - but am now wondering whether that is only reporting pillar 1? It doesn’t say one way or the other as far as I can see.

But if it does, it would explained why I’ve been so confused by the reporting on Leicester, because I can’t see anywhere near the number of cases there which the reporting has said... what was it, eight hundred and something in the two weeks to 23rd June.

lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=13014&mod-period=30&mod-area=E06000016&mod-group=AllUnitaryLaInCountry_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

STOP PRESS - This looks like positive news, seen on the BBC’s rolling coverage:

13:12
Local authorities given access to more testing data
There have been concerns that data isn't being provided to local authorities quickly enough, as we've reported here.

Now, the Department of Health says a data-sharing agreement has been reached.

It will give local authorities access to information about how many people have tested positive for coronavirus in the community in their area - rather than just the data on how many have tested positive in hospitals, which is what they've had up to now.

The new arrangement means local authorities can log on to a dashboard to see who is coming forward for testing, as well as their results, down to each postcode area.

Brent council also issued a statement saying it's rubbish and cases are declining here. Scare mongering from the press.

What @RedToothBrush and @Redolent posted about deloitte not have to report positive cases to local authorities and the lack of information at a local level beggars belief and has shocked me.

Why are Deloitte not reporting to PHE?

Please can someone on this thread tell me. When Nadine answered the question did she not explain why? PHE make all the decisions for everything basically, have shown to utterly useless in this pandemic, but anyway it is hardly surprising if they do not have the correct figures in the first place!

My local council have been posting about numbers not going down for the last few weeks, MP raised a question in parliament and were told it would be investigated.
Today the council (and the neighbouring council) has posted that they will not be opening children’s playgrounds on 4th July, so they obviously still have concerns, but I don’t think they are talking about lockdown.

The Guardian has now taken that map and list down, and replaced it with one using the Pillar One and Two data, FINALLY.

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

A top NHS bod from our local hospital warned that our nearest large town was heading this way. They posted on FB about a fortnight ago.

@Redolent

Just posted this is another thread. What a shitshow testing is.

———

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."

Christ that ND is useless. She should have stayed in the bloody jungle.

@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

The map in the article is pillar 1 only.

The map says there were 25 new cases last week and 29 new cases the week before in Leicester.

We know that this isn't the full data

As late as Thursday, when local public health bosses believed there were 80 new cases when there were in fact 944.

I'm pretty sure 25 + 29 isn't anywhere near 944.

90% of cases of covid-19 in Leicester were identified through pillar2 testing.

The Guardian (and any other media organisation) should not be using that map, yet they have in articles published today - after it has become abundantly clear its a grossly misleading map.

This particular article was published at 7.30pm yesterday. We could give the benefit of the doubt and say it was before the pillar 1 / pillar 2 issue was making headlines. However the Manchester Evening News have been chasing the lack of pillar2 data and running stories on it since June 9th. The Guardian should have been all over this like a rash and checking the data, because by the time this story was run, we knew Leicester was going into 2nd Lockdown yet that map taken at face value should have raised huge questions over why that was being done. Why lock down again for less than 50 cases when other places had more?

It's unforgivable in terms of fact checking an article before running it. It's outstandingly piss poor journalism.

@MRex and @PatriciaHolm, thanks.

I've always thought those numbers/areas looked stupid. I am happy to see that they are not coming form the government either.

I'm on the border of Suffolk, and the massive spike is 1, yes that's right 1 case. From 2 up to 3.

In other words the whole table is a crock of shite designed to scaremonger

It’s interesting, it say’s not one infected area is in London.

Almost if we're not ready for the easing of restrictions. We should have just got a hold of the virus quicker like Italy and Spain did.

Leicester also said the lockdown wasnt going go happen and it was scaremongering.

If this data was live you could keep checking your area, see where it was heading and I dont know, stay inside for the next week or so to bring it down! But no.

@Alex50

It’s interesting, it say’s not one infected area is in London.

Yes - London as a whole has an infection rate of 1.9/100,000 and the highest UTLA I can see is Kensington & Chelsea at 7.7. I think their population is around 150,000 so that would be a grand total of about 11 infections in the relevant week.

The Guardian (and any other media organisation) should not be using that map, yet they have in articles published today - after it has become abundantly clear its a grossly misleading map.

Everywhere seems to have taken it down now and replaced it with the more accurate rates per 100,000 for P1 and P2 one, thankfully.

@pigeon999

If I didn't know better I would think this was a clever ploy to get us all to stay in much more, and slow down on the partying front and take it easy (as if!) Nothing like a potential hellish lockdown to try and shunt us into line. However it will remain the case that those that broke the rules before will continue to do so, those that followed them to the letter will still be careful.

I think that's the point. The government know there's a layer of selfish people in this country who will do what they want no matter what (some of them are in government).

This is more designed at the people who have broadly followed the rules as a message that it's not all over, amid the insanity of half a million people going to one beach just because the sun is out, even in midweek.

Opening the pubs on a Saturday is insanity as well and they hope by panicking people over local lockdowns they'll panic publicans and local businesses into being responsible, as a cluster of cases and their business will be shut again.

This is more designed at the people who have broadly followed the rules as a message that it's not all over, amid the insanity of half a million people going to one beach just because the sun is out, even in midweek.

It's been taken down across the board now; I think it's far more likely to be the result of an statistically incompetent Journalist at the Daily Mail who needed a story than anything else. TBH, I think it was more likely to get people to ignore the threat as it was showing infection rates at 1 or 2 per area.

It's been replaced with a chart based on the current infection rate for P1 and P2 per 100,000 on the news outlets I've just looked at.

That Guardian article quoted the PM as saying: “As we approach July 4, I am afraid that the dangers – as we can see in Leicester – have not gone away. The virus is out there, still circling like a shark in the water, and it will take all our collective discipline and resolve to keep that virus at bay.”

Are we to assume the Government is modelling its public information releases on the Amityville councillors in Jaws?

I don’t understand the Pilar 1 and 2 stuff. Obviously when including the Level 2 stuff there’s more cases.....can someone explain what the difference is please? I’ve read the guardian article and it doesn’t explain.

Alex50. Thanks, I see Bedford on that list now, also that list looks more meaningful than the other one

@jacobreesmogadishu

Pillar One is tests that take place in hospitals for those with clinical needs, and health and care workers. We have data on this pretty much right from the start, as it's pretty easy to test people in hospital...

Pillar Two is the swab testing for the community at large. This really only started about 8 weeks ago. This makes up 75%+ of both tests and positives now.

Until last week, there was no real data available on the local levels of Pillar 2 data. A detailed spreadsheet was released a few days ago on the Gov website, but all the local area maps on press sites telling you the amount of cases are based on P1, which now significantly underreports levels of infections.

Now, this isn't necessarily anything to worry about as infections as a whole are decreasing, and P2 cases are only increasing in a few areas. But of course we need to know where those areas are in order to squash outbreaks as they happen. This is the issue with Leicester; localised data wasn't made available, so the regional authorities have struggled to figure out where the issues actually lie.

Better data seems to be coming through, but not at postcode level for the public yet.