Possible 2nd lockdown for Leicester?

[stix]

12 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

At least!

At least what? 

[Free Falling Foxes]

39 minutes ago, iniesta said:

He has a point tbf

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/third-world-leicester-17-people-1453500.amp

No doubt the solution will be to build yet more houses on greenfield sites but they'll become saturated with overcrowding too and just spread the problem still further.

Edited 3 July 2020 by Free Falling Foxes

[yorkie1999]

9 hours ago, stix said:

At least what? 

My mates a plumber, had to go to one house over there to do a job which turned out to be pee from a makeshift attic toilet. House contained over 40 residents

[Chrysalis]

On 02/07/2020 at 10:33, Christoph said:

Friend was driving by Evington road last night and said the streets were packed with people together. Some drinking together and all sorts. 

Its as someone said a couple of posts up they took the easy option.

 

Effectively all of us in the cleaner parts of the city area are been punished by those who dont care, and the same is happening again, the same people still dont care.

 

Also is a news article now where the county co9uncil tries to explain the insane borders they set, apparently it was a simple population density criteria, proximity to the hot spots wasnt a factor.  Again they treating the entire city equally as if they refuse to recognise publicly there its in specific areas.

 

For me it seems ludicrous someone in glenfield is in lockdown whilst at the same time the factories are still running and people in the hotspots are able to go to work etc.

 

Also I have done a FOI request asking for pillar 2 test counts for every city/county in england.

Edited 4 July 2020 by Chrysalis

[Mickyblueeyes]

10 hours ago, iniesta said:

He has a point tbf

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/third-world-leicester-17-people-1453500.amp

Lol. So you believe the whole of the East of Leicester live like this ? Because that was how he worded his initial comment - read it. That was the point being raised. So pulling up an article from 2018 is not really doing anything, is it ?

[Chrysalis]

On 02/07/2020 at 14:09, 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?

 

 

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

Edited 4 July 2020 by Chrysalis

[Mickyblueeyes]

4 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

This is a very good point. Such information is not even available. 

[Chrysalis]

On 02/07/2020 at 18:26, davieG said:

Merc

 

Police too stretched to respond to reports of lockdown house party in Eyres Monsell

Neighbours said there was shouting and cheering until 1am

 

By

Dan MartinPolitics Reporter

16:46, 2 JUL 2020

 

Police were unable to attend

 

Police have said officers were too stretched to deal with a lockdown house party in Leicester that went on into the early hours of this morning.

Residents say the party began at about 8pm last night at house in Pawley Gardens, in Eyes Monsell.

One person who lives nearby contacted LeicestershireLive about the gathering, which happened on the second night of the localised lockdown imposed on the city to combat a recent spike in coronavirus cases.

She said there was shouting and cheering going on until about 1am and that although they were called, the police had not come out.

The resident said: “This is why the virus is spreading In Leicester because there is no one enforcing the guidelines on the lawless.”

 

A Leicestershire Police spokeswoman said: “We were called at around 10.50pm yesterday to a report of a gathering at an address in Pawley Gardens.

“It was believed there were a number of people inside the address.

“Due to a significant demand on resources at the time of the report, we were unable to attend.

“Local officers will be carrying out inquiries into the circumstances of the report, offering advice to the occupants and carrying out extra patrols in the area.”

Leicestershire chief constable Simon Cole has urged people to stick to the rules - which restrict gatherings to six people - or ultimately face enforcement. He urged people who became aware of lockdown breaches, such as non-essential travel and gatherings, to report them.

He said: “We understand people are concerned and they are frustrated but the message is pretty simple.

“Stay at home. Only travel if you really need to.

“If you do really need to keep two metres away from others.”

Mr Cole said the sooner people adhered to the lockdown restrictions, the sooner Leicester could start to return to normal.

too busy with roadblocks out of city?

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

I think it’s pretty clear that the whole city is in lockdown because of issues occurring mainly in a few parts of it - but the idea that you can lockdown only parts of a conurbation is ludicrous- wait until there is a London wide lockdown on the back of a couple of boroughs having hotspots ... they may be able to use the river as a separation but nothing else works!

 

[Chrysalis]

40 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I think it’s pretty clear that the whole city is in lockdown because of issues occurring mainly in a few parts of it - but the idea that you can lockdown only parts of a conurbation is ludicrous- wait until there is a London wide lockdown on the back of a couple of boroughs having hotspots ... they may be able to use the river as a separation but nothing else works!

 

What you say is ludicrous is how other countries have done it, they just quarantine the postcodes in question.

 

I just seen this on a bbc news article, you couldnt make it up how dumb they are.

 

Quote

Health officials have found no obvious source for the surge in Leicester, which has had more than 500 cases among its population of 354,000, but found more young and middle-aged people had tested positive than in other parts of the Midlands.

 

Its also been revealed the reason why the mayor said there would be no lockdown the day before it happened because healthcare england didnt recommend it, it was overruled on the political level, so when hancock said it was done because of clinical advice he "lied".

 

Meanwhile an area in wales has had a similar issue but their health services did no lockdown because wait for it "its been caused by increased levels of testing".

 

The smaller the area the easier it is to lockdown, not sure why you think its harder to lockdown small areas, than an entire city.  Hence the reports of the police been unable to attend a call related to crowding in a western part of the city.

 

If london ever gets spikes, they will do a nationwide lockdown not a london lockdown, country policy is decided by the needs of london.

Edited 4 July 2020 by Chrysalis

[stix]

I’ve just read the latest article on Leicestershire Live regarding the official rules that were brought in yesterday regarding the localised lockdown. Pretty much back to the end of March for most. Although one person households can still maintain the bubble with another household, which is good for the likes of my mum, who had been able to form a bubble with my sister and her family. 
 

Im still a little confused about which businesses are allowed to stay open though. I work in aerospace, I live inside the lockdown zone, my place of work is outside of the lockdown zone in the north west of the county.  Am I allowed to travel to work? My company has deemed itself essential to its customers, whether rightly or wrongly I don’t know, and to be honest, the thought of not being able to go to work and having to stay at home again makes me more anxious than the threat of the virus does.  

Edited 4 July 2020 by stix

[Legend_in_blue]

1 hour ago, Chrysalis said:

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

 

Another key metric concerns those they will give a test to and those they will not.  I know of two people who have actively sought, and have had to fight for, a test.  In one case, only two of the three main symptoms were evident, and that wasn't good enough, and in the other case, a simple cough down the phone swayed them enough to allow a test to be carried out!

 

If they're only carrying out tests where full symptoms are evident, it's yet another factor that will lead to an overall bias in the data.

[stix]

2 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

Another key metric concerns those they will give a test to and those they will not.  I know of two people who have actively sought, and have had to fight for, a test.  In one case, only two of the three main symptoms were evident, and that wasn't good enough, and in the other case, a simple cough down the phone swayed them enough to allow a test to be carried out!

 

If they're only carrying out tests where full symptoms are evident, it's yet another factor that will lead to an overall bias in the data.

As far as I’ve seen, anyone can get a test now. Symptoms or not. Especially in Leicester right now. 

[Legend_in_blue]

5 minutes ago, stix said:

As far as I’ve seen, anyone can get a test now. Symptoms or not. Especially in Leicester right now. 

 

It hasn't happened with a couple of people I know in Leicestershire just outside the invisible red wall!

Edited 4 July 2020 by Legend_in_blue

[stix]

1 minute ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

It hasn't happened with a couple of people I know in Leicestershire just outside the invisible red wall!

I do find that strange. You can book online without issue in most instances. No questions asked really. We were all tested around 4 hours after booking on Wednesday. My extended family the same, and all staff at the school affected too. None had symptoms, and there wasn’t a need to mention the reason for testing as far as I know. 

[Chrysalis]

29 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

Another key metric concerns those they will give a test to and those they will not.  I know of two people who have actively sought, and have had to fight for, a test.  In one case, only two of the three main symptoms were evident, and that wasn't good enough, and in the other case, a simple cough down the phone swayed them enough to allow a test to be carried out!

 

If they're only carrying out tests where full symptoms are evident, it's yet another factor that will lead to an overall bias in the data.

Yep, the normal test criteria is actually fairly strict, you need symptoms, the walk in centres in the east of the city, its enough to just live with someone who you think "might" be infected.

[Costock_Fox]

1 hour ago, Chrysalis said:

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

I said the same yesterday, do an average positive tests per case figure.

[iniesta]

3 hours ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Lol. So you believe the whole of the East of Leicester live like this ? Because that was how he worded his initial comment - read it. That was the point being raised. So pulling up an article from 2018 is not really doing anything, is it ?

Lol where did he say the *whole* of east leicester live like it? 

 

The BAME councilor clearly states its a problem. Or is she a far right loon? 

 

Being more offended by words than private landlords letting illegal and unsafe HMO properties shows where the issue lies imo. 

 

 

[Captain...]

3 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

 

We are missing one key metric.

 

Number of tests carried out.

 

e.g. 

 

City A - 3 out of 4 tests positive, city deemed clean

City B - 80 out of 20016 tests positive, city deemed in need of lockdown

 

See the flaw?

 

Not only that the testing in Leicester has been aggressively targeted at the ethnic minority communities, its not even a balanced test.  If you going to lockdown a city, and then that entire city is affected by cases per 100 tests metric, then the city should be tested equally, not just in hotspots only.

 

A comparison would be e.g. deciding if a whole city is guilty of crimes committed in a gangster part of town.  Or putting a whole family in jail because one family member shot someone.

Completely agree, and have said so in another post, there is not enough information about to have a clear picture.

 

My posts have generally been on the subject of lockdown vs no lockdown when a spike has been found. I agree that the Leicester numbers could be misleading based on number of tests, but it still doesn't look great.

 

I do think when there is a spike there needs to be a response you can't let the virus take hold again. It is still not clear what a proportional response is and the government's handling of Leicester seems to be very reactive with no effort to really understand the situation and how comparable it is to other cities and Leicester pre lockdown.

 

I still maintain that if Leicester is being used as a guinea pig then I'd rather it was a guinea pig for local lockdown rather than to see what happens if a spike is left unchecked in the community.

[Captain...]

Question for everyone in the lockdown zone, are you wearing masks while you are out and about or in shops?

[Chrysalis]

31 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Question for everyone in the lockdown zone, are you wearing masks while you are out and about or in shops?

I am not going to shops as I consider that silly.

 

But I went to a family member's house yesterday family bubble thing, and wore a mask in the street and in the car.

When I went to the chemist in april, I wore a mask.

 

I would say looking outside, the vast majority of people are not wearing masks.  Masks are not been taken seriously due to yet another government failure, where they telling people they only needed when in close proximity for 15 minutes.

[Chrysalis]

40 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Completely agree, and have said so in another post, there is not enough information about to have a clear picture.

 

My posts have generally been on the subject of lockdown vs no lockdown when a spike has been found. I agree that the Leicester numbers could be misleading based on number of tests, but it still doesn't look great.

 

I do think when there is a spike there needs to be a response you can't let the virus take hold again. It is still not clear what a proportional response is and the government's handling of Leicester seems to be very reactive with no effort to really understand the situation and how comparable it is to other cities and Leicester pre lockdown.

 

I still maintain that if Leicester is being used as a guinea pig then I'd rather it was a guinea pig for local lockdown rather than to see what happens if a spike is left unchecked in the community.

I would say it is been left unchecked, I have seen no proof of people been quarantined in their homes, no factories shut down, police unable to attend calls to deal with groups of people.  The only effort seems to be road blocks and a few shops been closed (out of dozens reported).

 

If people have proof that I am wrong please post here, as I really hope I am wrong.

 

On the numbers I accept Leicester's are high, the test methodology wont be fully accounting for it and we do have higher levels of hospital admissions, but I think the jump from 45 to 135 per 100k, is a direct result of the testing changes since 16 june.  I expect since that date any fairness has gone out of the window.

 

Also the mayor replied to me today (or an assistant signing as the mayor), he has in short pointed me to a government guidance page here, and just said testing is been ramped up.  Didnt address my point about it been only in the east side of the city.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-exceedances-in-leicester

Edited 4 July 2020 by Chrysalis

[Countryfox]

Well it seems that national newshounds are now on the scent of the ‘rag trade problem’ we have in Leicester ...   one company that uses these back street sweatshops is called Boohoo and was founded by Mahmud Kamani and Carol Kane .. it’s now worth over £3 billion.     I wonder if Sir Pete knows about this one ...  Pete ! ... Pete !, ... are you reading this ! ...    This is right at the heart of 3 big issues ...  the spreading of Corona virus, slave labour and illegal immigration ...   can you get some council boys round there pronto please Pete !   How is this company able to get away with it ffs.    And ..   rather than wait for the two owners to donate a few bob to the poor and needy and get knighted when they get older,  and then have a nice big statue put up in the city and then pull it down a couple of years later ...   why don’t we do something about it now.

[Captain...]

16 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

I am not going to shops as I consider that silly.

 

But I went to a family member's house yesterday family bubble thing, and wore a mask in the street and in the car.

When I went to the chemist in april, I wore a mask.

 

I would say looking outside, the vast majority of people are not wearing masks.  Masks are not been taken seriously due to yet another government failure, where they telling people they only needed when in close proximity for 15 minutes.

This is the thing that I find most odd, the easiest change to make without impacting life is make wearing a mask mandatory. 

 

I've been very reluctant to wear a mask because I don't like them and it makes me touch my face more, but they do help control the spread of this disease and if the rule was masks are mandatory in shops I would wear it every time I'm in a shop. Why apply it just to public transport?

 

First measure where there is a detected spike should be mandatory face coverings in public.

[Fightforever]

2 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

Well it seems that national newshounds are now on the scent of the ‘rag trade problem’ we have in Leicester ...   one company that uses these back street sweatshops is called Boohoo and was founded by Mahmud Kamani and Carol Kane .. it’s now worth over £3 billion.     I wonder if Sir Pete knows about this one ...  Pete ! ... Pete !, ... are you reading this ! ...    This is right at the heart of 3 big issues ...  the spreading of Corona virus, slave labour and illegal immigration ...   can you get some council boys round there pronto please Pete !   How is this company able to get away with it ffs.    And ..   rather than wait for the two owners to donate a few bob to the poor and needy and get knighted when they get older,  and then have a nice big statue put up in the city and then pull it down a couple of years later ...   why don’t we do something about it now.

Been in some of those places wasn't a nice sight