Possible 2nd lockdown for Leicester?

[Monsall]

52 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

According to the list and map, Highfields is not the epicentre. The epicentre is North Evington (adjoining Highfields) and Belgrave, Stoneygate & Spinney Hills, to a lesser extent.

Highfields is in the North Evington ward it will be the epicentre.

[yorkie1999]

[Monsall]

29 minutes ago, Captain... said:

One reason is they can't identify all at risk people and whilst the majority of deaths are elderly or have underlying health conditions there are still many deaths and critical patients who don't fall into those categories. Particularly in the asian community. As well as many fit and healthy people who have been taken out for weeks with strong symptoms. It is a nasty horrible fatal disease and doesn't only affect "vulnerable". It's not just about saving lives in the short term, even if you could successfully isolate everyone who could be killed by it (which we haven't been able to so far), if you let it spread in a place like Leicester to get the economy going it is going to take even longer for the country to be free of the disease.

 

 

I'm English, my first language is English and I have no idea what the rules actually are any more. If anybody who doesn't speak English as a first language understands Boris' incoherent waffle then they deserve medal.

There are less than 300 deaths in England under 60, with no KNOWN underlying health conditions who have died of or with CCP Virus, most of those were health workers for obvious reasons more exposed. Fit and healthy people do not get affected by this virus any more than any flu, probably less, even when older. This hits the old and unfit overwhelmingly. NHS stats are totally clear on this. Everybody should get checked out for high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and cholestorol, if they are up do something quick, coronavirus is something we may have to live with for some time. Fear and panic porn is no answer. 

[Alf Bentley]

13 minutes ago, Monsall said:

Highfields is in the North Evington ward it will be the epicentre.

 

Not according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highfields,_Leicester

"Highfields is an inner city area of Leicester. [...] The population is split between the Spinney Hills, Wycliffe and Stoneygate wards of the Leicester City Council".

 

And not according to the council's ward map: http://www.cabinet.leicester.gov.uk:8071/documents/s111139/All City Wards.pdf

 

So, Highfields is divided between the wards that rank 3rd, 4th and 7th for infections in the list.

[FoxesDeb]

20 minutes ago, Monsall said:

There are less than 300 deaths in England under 60, with no KNOWN underlying health conditions who have died of or with CCP Virus, most of those were health workers for obvious reasons more exposed. Fit and healthy people do not get affected by this virus any more than any flu, probably less, even when older. This hits the old and unfit overwhelmingly. NHS stats are totally clear on this. Everybody should get checked out for high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and cholestorol, if they are up do something quick, coronavirus is something we may have to live with for some time. Fear and panic porn is no answer. 

I'm not sure where you got that from, but I disagree, as does all the information to the contrary below. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200622-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19-infection

 

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/06/02/covid-health-effects

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-long-term-health-disease-covid-19-lungs-heart-brain-a9546671.html

[Monsall]

1 minute ago, FoxesDeb said:

I'm not sure where you got that from, but I disagree, as does all the information to the contrary below. 

 

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200622-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19-infection

 

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/06/02/covid-health-effects

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-long-term-health-disease-covid-19-lungs-heart-brain-a9546671.html

The key is fit and healthy I get it from the NHS death stats. Nothing about existing conditions in those reports. If you already have existing serious problems you don't want to get CCP Virus we all know that. 

[fuchsntf]

20 hours ago, BKLFox said:

@Jon the Hat Guys, i know my comment was blunter (is that a word) than intended & i fully get where your coming from as i advocate getting the economy rolling again also.

 

I wanted to highlight the turn around in approach/thinking/mentality because now the general talk is protect the vulnerable & everyone else crack on, now when that was mooted right at the beginning ala herd mentality the Government were loudly slammed.

Everybody in the Uk, from politicians ,businesses,constituents   should start asking themselves,what are we doing wrong...across our society,that allows

Corvid-19. Still holding so tight a grip and fear through our society....!!!

[Monsall]

26 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Not according to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highfields,_Leicester

"Highfields is an inner city area of Leicester. [...] The population is split between the Spinney Hills, Wycliffe and Stoneygate wards of the Leicester City Council".

 

And not according to the council's ward map: http://www.cabinet.leicester.gov.uk:8071/documents/s111139/All City Wards.pdf

 

So, Highfields is divided between the wards that rank 3rd, 4th and 7th for infections in the list.

The wikipedia entry answers the conundrum. That area has always been Highfields to most I would say.

[yorkie1999]

7 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Everybody in the Uk, from politicians ,businesses,constituents   should start asking themselves,what are we doing wrong...across our society,that allows

Corvid-19. Still holding so tight a grip and fear through our society....!!!

Not washing their hands enough. Dirty sods. 

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, Monsall said:

There are less than 300 deaths in England under 60, with no KNOWN underlying health conditions who have died of or with CCP Virus, most of those were health workers for obvious reasons more exposed. Fit and healthy people do not get affected by this virus any more than any flu, probably less, even when older. This hits the old and unfit overwhelmingly. NHS stats are totally clear on this. Everybody should get checked out for high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and cholestorol, if they are up do something quick, coronavirus is something we may have to live with for some time. Fear and panic porn is no answer. 

How many between 60 and 70 (70+ being the cut off for vulnerable)?

 

Are we changing the definition of vulnerable to 60+?

 

You are right everybody should be getting checked for diabetes etc, but how many are?

 

There have been plenty of reports of young fit and healthy people dying or having severe symptoms, and plenty that have followed advice stayed at home and not had their cases and symptoms recorded. Like most people I know a few people who suspect they've had it. Some have had mild symptoms, more seem to have had quite severe reactions that take weeks go.

 

So far we have not be able to identify all vulnerable people and not protect the ones we have identified. Even if we could in a localised area like Leicester I can not agree that letting the virus spread uncontrolled to protect the economy is a good idea. there are still so many unknowns the recent reports of long term side effects particularly relating to mental health are very worrying and my priority would be to eliminate the virus.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Monsall said:

The key is fit and healthy I get it from the NHS death stats. Nothing about existing conditions in those reports. If you already have existing serious problems you don't want to get CCP Virus we all know that. 

Curious to know if there is a reason for this particular nomenclature?

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 minute ago, Captain... said:

There have been plenty of reports of young fit and healthy people dying or having severe symptoms, and plenty that have followed advice stayed at home and not had their cases and symptoms recorded. Like most people I know a few people who suspect they've had it. Some have had mild symptoms, more seem to have had quite severe reactions that take weeks go.

Is there plenty of reports of young fit and healthy people under the age of 50 dying from this virus? I don't think there is.

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Curious to know if there is a reason for this particular nomenclature?

Because it is at the same time, suggestive, aggressive and pushes all blame for the virus on a hard racial curve?

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Because it is at the same time, suggestive, aggressive and pushes all blame for the virus on a hard racial curve?

I didn't want to make that or another assumption until I had further information tbh, but yes - that among other reasons is why my curiosity is piqued.

[Paninistickers]

2 hours ago, Monsall said:

There are less than 300 deaths in England under 60, with no KNOWN underlying health conditions who have died of or with CCP Virus, most of those were health workers for obvious reasons more exposed. Fit and healthy people do not get affected by this virus any more than any flu, probably less, even when older. This hits the old and unfit overwhelmingly. NHS stats are totally clear on this. Everybody should get checked out for high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and cholestorol, if they are up do something quick, coronavirus is something we may have to live with for some time. Fear and panic porn is no answer. 

Great post. 

 

There's a sizeable % I'd guess that are entirely happy to live with an element of risk and frankly, don't give two shits to a virus that's statistically unlikely to do much harm. 

 

But I accept there's a large % absolutely terrified of this.

 

Really, secretly, surely the govt should prepare a campaign of managed acceptance of this and begin to soften the demonisation of this virus. 

 

People don't go around terrified of developing cancer. It's a fact of life and you deal with it only if you get it.

[davieG]

15 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Is there plenty of reports of young fit and healthy people under the age of 50 dying from this virus? I don't think there is.

Seems to be a part of the reason for the Leicester lockdown.

 

Age

Public Health England say that “if an excess of infections has occurred then it is occurring in young and middle-aged people”.

Graphs included show that fewer than 10 under 18s a day have tested positive throughout the pandemic, but numbers do rise in June.

The report states: “Since the beginning of June there has been good provision of primary school access for children in Leicester, 94 per cent of child-day place availability capacity is being utilised.

The report says that health officials have been unable to provide any analytical link to the new infections to the reopening of schools at the start of June.

The majority of cases confirmed most recently are aged 18 to 65 years. The number of cases in those aged 65 years and over has been stable whereas cases reported in those under 18 years of age have been slowly increasing in the last four weeks.

The report says that the average (median) age of those testing positive in the last fortnight is 39.

[Leicester_Loyal]

Oh they get the virus don't get me wrong, but the number of perfectly fit and healthy 10-39 year olds that die from this number will be tiny.

[GingerrrFox]

3 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Oh they get the virus don't get me wrong, but the number of perfectly fit and healthy 10-39 year olds that die from this number will be tiny.

Let’s be honest the number of people dying from this virus is tiny full stop. This approach from the government is not sustainable. 

[jonthefox]

Looks like we’ve got to swerve Nottingham chaps. Small blessings and all that.

[Leicester_Loyal]

4 minutes ago, GingerrrFox said:

Let’s be honest the number of people dying from this virus is tiny full stop. This approach from the government is not sustainable. 

I do agree that the vulnerable and the elderly should be protected, but not everyone.

[Dahnsouff]

4 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

I do agree that the vulnerable and the elderly should be protected, but not everyone.

I am not convinced this has ever been in debate after the initial lockdown, but it is the segregation that represents a problem as the groups will inter mix.

[Captain...]

34 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Is there plenty of reports of young fit and healthy people under the age of 50 dying from this virus? I don't think there is.

Yes there are, Google it and pick your news source of choice. 

 

Here's one from the Guardian:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/why-do-some-young-people-die-of-coronavirus-covid-19-genes-viral-load

 

There is still too much unknown to predict the short and long term impact of letting a small localised spike carry on unchecked. One of the things discussed is getting a high viral load being a cause of death on young fit and healthy. This is high exposure to the virus something that we have managed to limit in most cases, health workers being the exception and the number of fit and healthy NHS staff that have died backs this point up. The other possibility is genetic markers that we don't know which could be why it is having a greater impact on ethnic minorities. This is also not yet known. 

 

There are too many unknowns to be anything other than extremely cautious, and have any goal other than eliminating this virus.

 

People are complaining Leicester is being used as a guinea pig for local lockdowns, would you rather it was used as a guinea pig for seeing the effects of a mass unchecked localised outbreak Covid-19?

 

 

[Leicester_Loyal]

33 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Yes there are, Google it and pick your news source of choice. 

 

Here's one from the Guardian:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/why-do-some-young-people-die-of-coronavirus-covid-19-genes-viral-load

 

There is still too much unknown to predict the short and long term impact of letting a small localised spike carry on unchecked. One of the things discussed is getting a high viral load being a cause of death on young fit and healthy. This is high exposure to the virus something that we have managed to limit in most cases, health workers being the exception and the number of fit and healthy NHS staff that have died backs this point up. The other possibility is genetic markers that we don't know which could be why it is having a greater impact on ethnic minorities. This is also not yet known. 

 

There are too many unknowns to be anything other than extremely cautious, and have any goal other than eliminating this virus.

 

People are complaining Leicester is being used as a guinea pig for local lockdowns, would you rather it was used as a guinea pig for seeing the effects of a mass unchecked localised outbreak Covid-19?

 

 

Where's the numbers of young fit and healthy people dying?

 

Some people die from lightning strikes each year but that doesn't mean that plenty of people die from lightning strikes each year. Just had a quick google and found this.

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kids-more-likely-struck-lightning-22166411

[Captain...]

11 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Where's the numbers of young fit and healthy people dying?

 

Some people die from lightning strikes each year but that doesn't mean that plenty of people die from lightning strikes each year. Just had a quick google and found this.

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kids-more-likely-struck-lightning-22166411

We're not talking kids we're talking fit and healthy adults.

 

I get it, you think you won't get it, or you won't get it badly, it probably won't kill you if you do get it. We are basing all of our numbers on lockdown scenarios, and whilst the odds are low you are massively increasing that risk by coming out of lockdown while there is a spike in cases (you can argue about whether this is a spike in cases in Leicester, but that's a separate issue) and if we should restrict the many to save the few. 

 

It's tough, but there is so much still unknown I would be doing everything in my power to eliminate the virus before winter because winter at the best of times puts a strain on the NHS, covid-19 is thought to thrive in colder months, if we are not rid of this by winter and don't have a vaccine in place it could be catastrophic.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Oh they get the virus don't get me wrong, but the number of perfectly fit and healthy 10-39 year olds that die from this number will be tiny.

 

Not withstanding @Captain...'s valid point that increased viral load might increase the risk to younger, healthier people, as things stand the virus is killing a tiny proportion of 10-39-year-olds.

 

But a tiny proportion can become a big number in absolute terms if you end up with most younger people getting infected.

 

There's also the point that @FoxesDeb made with her links: this virus can do a lot of damage even to those who don't die - including younger people - potentially leaving them with weak hearts, devastated lungs and other conditions for the rest of their lives - and the information about this is pretty sketchy so far, so it makes sense to err on the side of caution until we understand the impact better.

 

 

59 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

I do agree that the vulnerable and the elderly should be protected, but not everyone.

 

How long for, though? Weeks? Months? Years? If infection rates remain high and keep spreading among younger people, such protection could be required for years if there's no early vaccine.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm guessing you're in the younger age-group. If so, how would you feel if the roles were reversed and a virus mainly affected the young? That happened with the Spanish flu of 1918, I think.

How would you feel if less vulnerable older people were saying: "We'll protect you. You stay at home and put your life on hold for an indefinite period - could be months/years - while we get on with our lives"?

 

I'm not elderly or extremely vulnerable, but I am late 50s and have a heart condition that makes it inadvisable to have much social contact if the virus remains at high levels.

Frankly, this lockdown is doing my head in already. I can tolerate it for a few more weeks or whatever is required.....but life on hold being "protected" indefinitely - potentially for months or years? How would you feel if you faced that?