Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
weller54

Possible 2nd lockdown for Leicester?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Kent is a county of 1.6 million 

 

there is no indication that the whole county of leics is being restricted.  You can’t compare the city of Leicester and the county of Kent re case counts - the risk of the outbreak spreading quickly in a city is way higher than across a county. 

 

the argument about more testing = more cases is of course true on a basic level but they don’t just look at absolute numbers, they look at percentages. 
 

Let’s say you had 10 cases and had made 1000 tests

 

now you increase the testing to 10,000 (you would now expect approx 100 cases).   If the number of cases is notably higher than 100 then you have a possible problem that needs more investigation. 
 

is there any evidence that people with no symptoms are being tested ?? that would be the only issue with my argument  as in the 1000 tests, no asymptomatic cases would’ve be likely to be found because only those with symptoms were being tested.   

 

 

Yes, its been announced that anyone over the age of 5 can get tested even if they got no symptoms now, these are special rules only for Leicester.

 

Also they doing infected per 100k, no mention of number of tests been a factor, just number of infected as % of population.

 

Also it looks like the lockdown areas has been expanded today to include LFE and some other areas which were excluded last night.

Edited by Chrysalis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thurnby isn’t included and it’s right next to the areas affected. Glenfield, 6 miles away and across the city, is lol. They just want to be seen as doing something and the outbreak happened 12 days ago now

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stadt said:

Thurnby isn’t included and it’s right next to the areas affected. Glenfield, 6 miles away and across the city, is lol. They just want to be seen as doing something and the outbreak happened 12 days ago now

Yeah they making an effort to pretend its not just parts of the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

Yeah they making an effort to pretend its not just parts of the city.

In fairness locking down just parts of the same city/urban area would surely be completely impossible. The boundary is really bizarre though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is ridiculous. I am not usually a conspiracy theorist but Leicester is being used here. The more and more you see it, the more and more it doesn't add up. The outbreak (more so a spike) occurred 12 days ago. We are on the downward part of the chart. It doesn't seem to be down to hospital admission but instead due to an increase in numbers being tested. The media attention is going to increase racial tensions because some will always be happy to blame others and it will literally kill off many sole traders. They were slow to react to the spike and now have produced a map that makes absolutely no sense. We have been in pandemic mode for four ****ing months and it took an announcement at 9pm to introduce a local lockdown, without the information as to how it will be administered.  This Govt is ****ing bullshit. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Thurnby isn’t included and it’s right next to the areas affected. Glenfield, 6 miles away and across the city, is lol. They just want to be seen as doing something and the outbreak happened 12 days ago now

This is just what I thought.  Glen Parva another ambiguous area to be banned yet thurnby and  scraptoft lane areas right next to a high concentration of the problem get off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

In fairness locking down just parts of the same city/urban area would surely be completely impossible. The boundary is really bizarre though.

Actually the smaller the area the easier it is to manage.  Although it might be the areas are a bit too big.

 

The boundary is odd, they have a bigger area covered on the west when the issue is in the east.  Syston is closer to the hotspots than me, and I am well inside the boundary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And herein lies the problem, my younger sister has told me her friends from the city are planning to come to the outskirts now so they can go to the pub.

 

The only way this was going to work was if it was under strict enforcement. The fact they cobbled together a map overnight (splitting some towns right down the middle) sums it up.

 

Mixed together with those who were suffering from lockdown fatigue before, and also those who near the end of lockdown did decide to just do what they wanted.

 

I really hope we didn't need a lockdown and that this is a tester. Because it will be a miracle if it has its desired effect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

Actually the smaller the area the easier it is to manage.  Although it might be the areas are a bit too big.

 

The boundary is odd, they have a bigger area covered on the west when the issue is in the east.  Syston is closer to the hotspots than me, and I am well inside the boundary.

 

I agree with that logic, but obviously that's going to be ridiculously hard within a larger urban area. A village or small town is much more manageable. In a city you're literally going to have neighbours who can't see each other or people who can't cross the road. It's unpoliceable.

Edited by Voll Blau
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheUltimateWinner said:

And herein lies the problem, my younger sister has told me her friends from the city are planning to come to the outskirts now so they can go to the pub.

 

The only way this was going to work was if it was under strict enforcement. The fact they cobbled together a map overnight (splitting some towns right down the middle) sums it up.

 

Mixed together with those who were suffering from lockdown fatigue before, and also those who near the end of lockdown did decide to just do what they wanted.

 

I really hope we didn't need a lockdown and that this is a tester. Because it will be a miracle if it has its desired effect.

They will claim victory because numbers are already dropping, but it's clear they haven't got a clue.

 

Only aside I would add is I imagine glenfield is included because of the hospital.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't change a thing. I live in Braunstone and most people here seem to have taken it as a personal challenge to try and break each and every rule that has been set since the 21st March. In and out of each others houses etc. parties still going on for kids and all sorts. Most people here will probably travel out of the city when they never had plans to do so anyway.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lcfc278 said:

It won't change a thing. I live in Braunstone and most people here seem to have taken it as a personal challenge to try and break each and every rule that has been set since the 21st March. In and out of each others houses etc. parties still going on for kids and all sorts. Most people here will probably travel out of the city when they never had plans to do so anyway.

I'm welling up,

these people make you proud to be from leicester

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

They will claim victory because numbers are already dropping, but it's clear they haven't got a clue.

 

Only aside I would add is I imagine glenfield is included because of the hospital.

The hospital isn’t even in Glenfield lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, worthosoriginals said:

I'm welling up,

these people make you proud to be from leicester

And the majority of whom that will be now foaming at the mouth and blaming certain other communities completely oblivious to their own actions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on the subject of number of tests been taken into account?

 

Quote

The mayor of the city, Sir Peter Soulsby, said on BBC Radio 4 this morning that a report sent to him by the Government 'actually acknowledges that it's very likely that the increase in number of positives identified is a result of increased testing, and that actually there's perhaps nothing of any great significance in those results.'

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...