Is it time to move to a more localised approach to lockdown?

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
248
It is certainly worth pointing out again that the Leicester situation is NOT “a two week lockdown”. It is an INDEFINITE lockdown, with two week reviews, in much the same way as the original one had regular three week reviews.

The expectation is that this will last most of the summer.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
Nobody with half a braincell will ever start a business again if this kind of thing continues. Economic suicide - brought to you by the 'party of small business'!
The "party of small business" that has been paying vast amounts of money out to cover employees' salaries for businesses of any size, pretty much no questions asked?
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
4,786
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
It is certainly worth pointing out again that the Leicester situation is NOT “a two week lockdown”. It is an INDEFINITE lockdown, with two week reviews, in much the same way as the original one had regular three week reviews.

The expectation is that this will last most of the summer.
In which case Leicester, and indeed any other area that gets locked down can kiss goodbye to their local economies. Because with uncertainty in localised areas. any businesses that can get out might just start to think about doing so, whilst those that can't won't be able to plan. At the very least lockdowns should be unlimited by exception, not the other way around.
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
248
In which case Leicester, and indeed any other area that gets locked down can kiss goodbye to their local economies. Because with uncertainty in localised areas. any businesses that can get out might just start to think about doing so, whilst those that can't won't be able to plan. At the very least lockdowns should be unlimited by exception, not the other way around.
Exactly.

As a result the entire city is now basically destroyed economically.
Leicester children receive less education than other cities.
Leicester’s economy has less chance to recover than other cities.
Government assistance like the furlough scheme will now stop too soon for Leicester.
And much more.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
23,625
Location
Yorks
The authorities really need to take the opportunity to undertake a programme of mass community testing in Leicester to ascertain where and why cases are spreading. The worst of all worlds would be to have a local lockdown of this type and not gain additional understanding from it.
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
248
The authorities really need to take the opportunity to undertake a programme of mass community testing in Leicester to ascertain where and why cases are spreading. The worst of all worlds would be to have a local lockdown of this type and not gain additional understanding from it.
Well anyone can be tested already as long as they have symptoms.

Apparently if you don’t have symptoms the result will be negative even you have the virus.
 

adc82140

Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
624
They should now be implementing door to door testing in Leicester to effect a quick exit from this. The spit in a pot test will do, like they're doing in Melbourne. It won't identify every case, but it will identify cases with a virus load high enough to be of concern.

Edit- what Yorksrob said
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
Well anyone can be tested already as long as they have symptoms.

Apparently if you don’t have symptoms the result will be negative even you have the virus.
It seems to be generally accepted that there are a large proportion of asymptomatic carriers. If a test won't identify them, how do we know this?
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
In which case Leicester, and indeed any other area that gets locked down can kiss goodbye to their local economies. Because with uncertainty in localised areas. any businesses that can get out might just start to think about doing so, whilst those that can't won't be able to plan. At the very least lockdowns should be unlimited by exception, not the other way around.
Or we could leave local "hotspots" alone and let them spread to the whole UK. That might not be great for the economy either.

The smaller the part of the country that remains under strong restrictions, the greater the country's ability to compensate businesses, I'd have thought.

I'm not sure what you mean by "unlimited by exception". So far as I know it's for two weeks and then to be reviewed, not "for ever" but they'll look every 2 weeks to see if they can stop the restrictions.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
23,625
Location
Yorks
Well anyone can be tested already as long as they have symptoms.

Apparently if you don’t have symptoms the result will be negative even you have the virus.
They need a lot more than that.

I'm talking door-to-door testing of the whole population as @adc82140 says. That way you get near enough everyone.

It would have been impractical nationwide, but should be possible for a city the size of leicester.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
4,786
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Exactly.

As a result the entire city is now basically destroyed economically.
Leicester children receive less education than other cities.
Leicester’s economy has less chance to recover than other cities.
Government assistance like the furlough scheme will now stop too soon for Leicester.
And much more.
Indeed, lockdowns be they national or localised are not "get out of jail free" cards, they come at a cost & usually to those least able to stand them. The government needs to be careful not just to use this method as a knee jerk reaction every time a spike is seen. Contact tracing and understanding the source is far more effective than just shutting down now.

The authorities really need to take the opportunity to undertake a programme of mass community testing in Leicester to ascertain where and why cases are spreading. The worst of all worlds would be to have a local lockdown of this type and not gain additional understanding from it.
I agree, although as things stand the government still haven't decided exactly what area to shut down.

Well anyone can be tested already as long as they have symptoms.

Apparently if you don’t have symptoms the result will be negative even you have the virus.
Swab tests do identify asymptomatic cases. The recent spike in Beijing had about 80% asymptomatic.
So if the latter is the case, which I would be very surprised if it were not, then that contact tracing is all the more invaluable. Sadly, reading the news reports this morning this seems to have failed, even though there are suggestions that the spread may be centred around some local food production industries? So is the lockdown a deflection by the government, I hope not.

Or we could leave local "hotspots" alone and let them spread to the whole UK. That might not be great for the economy either.

The smaller the part of the country that remains under strong restrictions, the greater the country's ability to compensate businesses, I'd have thought.

I'm not sure what you mean by "unlimited by exception". So far as I know it's for two weeks and then to be reviewed, not "for ever" but they'll look every 2 weeks to see if they can stop the restrictions.
I am not suggesting "leaving" anything, quite the opposite. As I said lockdowns ought to be for limited periods whilst the government concentrate on contact tracing in those areas, making them indefinite only if the sources cannot be traced, which would in most cases be unlikely.
 

geoffk

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
1,446
Whilst having local "lockdowns" does carry some merit, it is true that this will make planning for businesses, transport, even health care very problematic to say the least. Now looking around at some of the data, the mean incubation period for the virus is coming in at around 5-6 days, as opposed to the more cautious outlier of 14 days adopted by the government's new policy (there have been some instances of incubation periods into 20+ days, but these seem to be the absolute exceptions rather than the norm). So what I would propose is that a 14 day "lockdown" come not only with intensive test & tracing, but also a 7 day review of that testing data to see if the lockdown can be released early if the trend is in the right direction.

What this would mean is that businesses could get back to normal operations by day +15 rather than waiting for the 14 day review, and then having to restart supply chains, prepare premises and maybe not get back into operation for several days after a 14 day reviews clears the lockdown. We need to be able to quickly respond to local spikes, which are likely to happen, but also be able to clear any additional measures quickly to minimise disruption to the local economies. Too many businesses are on the edge right now, and even short future disruptions could spell the death knell for them and tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of jobs.
And this could now happen anywhere, at a few days notice, if there is a local rise in infections. It's not just Leicester but apparently includes Oadby, Glenfield and Birstall.
 

cuccir

Established Member
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
3,356
It is certainly worth pointing out again that the Leicester situation is NOT “a two week lockdown”. It is an INDEFINITE lockdown, with two week reviews, in much the same way as the original one had regular three week reviews.

The expectation is that this will last most of the summer.
A big difference from Germany where my understanding is that there's a clear number of cases per thousand people that is a threshold for passing into a local lockdown, and a clear number for passing out of a local lockdown.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
Indeed, lockdowns be they national or localised are not "get out of jail free" cards, they come at a cost & usually to those least able to stand them. The government needs to be careful not just to use this method as a knee jerk reaction every time a spike is seen. Contact tracing and understanding the source is far more effective than just shutting down now.
From what's being reported today, for some time the government has been monitoring various areas with higher than normal incidences of infections and as you say trying to understand the source, but in Leicester they now think that it's got to the stage where they need to take stronger measures.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
4,786
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
From what's being reported today, for some time the government has been monitoring various areas with higher than normal incidences of infections and as you say trying to understand the source, but in Leicester they now think that it's got to the stage where they need to take stronger measures.
There have been a number of areas where spikes have appeared, mainly at the moment at least centred around food processing plants where the working conditions do seem to present more of a risk. These kinds of spikes should be relatively easy to contact track if caught quick enough, unfortunately for Leicester it seems the reaction was too slow (it's been known about for around 11 days as I'm led to understand) and so as you say they've had to force further measures.

Incidentally the Health Secretary made a boob this morning, stating that another spike had been found in Keighley which has prompted Bradford Council to tweet that he actually meant Kirkless, where a food processing plant in Cleckheaton had been found. It really helps to get the facts right first time Mr Hancock!
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
Incidentally the Health Secretary made a boob this morning, stating that another spike had been found in Keighley which has prompted Bradford Council to tweet that he actually meant Kirkless, where a food processing plant in Cleckheaton had been found. It really helps to get the facts right first time Mr Hancock!
Details...details...

Same county anyway.
 

Andy Pacer

Member
Joined
11 Jul 2017
Messages
712
And this could now happen anywhere, at a few days notice, if there is a local rise in infections. It's not just Leicester but apparently includes Oadby, Glenfield and Birstall.
For those interested in the specifics, attached is the latest map (apparently released by the local authority) showing the lockdown 'zone' of Greater Leicester.
FB_IMG_1593506970303.jpg
 

adc82140

Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
624
Don't take much notice of the crap published in today's tabloids about other possible areas facing imminent lockdown. Take Plymouth as an example. 3 cases up from 2 does not equate to a "spike"
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
3,528
Location
Nottingham
Don't take much notice of the crap published in today's tabloids about other possible areas facing imminent lockdown. Take Plymouth as an example. 3 cases up from 2 does not equate to a "spike"
But it's a 50% increase in cases!

More seriously, in signal processing, spikes are anomalies to ignore. But I suppose "sustained increase outside of the 95% confidence interval" doesn't sound as scary!
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
But it's a 50% increase in cases!

More seriously, in signal processing, spikes are anomalies to ignore. But I suppose "sustained increase outside of the 95% confidence interval" doesn't sound as scary!
It would be nice to see an overall more educated approach to statistics in the media, wouldn't it?
 

MikeWM

Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
866
Location
Ely
It would be nice to see an overall more educated approach to statistics in the media, wouldn't it?
I've said for main years that this is something that should be taught, and taught well, in schools, even at a fairly young age. Once you've noticed, or are trained to notice, the tricks the media use (inadvertently or deliberately, take your pick) then they are usually easy to spot.

Of course today, that would require there to be schools, and lessons, and similar things that we don't seem to think are important anymore.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
162
I've said for main years that this is something that should be taught, and taught well, in schools, even at a fairly young age. Once you've noticed, or are trained to notice, the tricks the media use (inadvertently or deliberately, take your pick) then they are usually easy to spot.

Of course today, that would require there to be schools, and lessons, and similar things that we don't seem to think are important anymore.
I'd certainly say that some education in how not to be tricked by the media would be excellent - there's more of it than just statistics. Advertising too (e.g. "nothing works faster" doesn't mean "faster than the competition").

I think it's a bit unfair to say that school aren't considered important at the moment though.

I am not suggesting "leaving" anything, quite the opposite. As I said lockdowns ought to be for limited periods whilst the government concentrate on contact tracing in those areas, making them indefinite only if the sources cannot be traced, which would in most cases be unlikely.
Has it been suggested that the proposal is that Leicester is just left to its own devices while waiting for cases to drop thanks to the lockdown without putting in any effort to working out where they're coming from?
 

MikeWM

Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
866
Location
Ely
I think it's a bit unfair to say that school aren't considered important at the moment though.
Why close the schools in Leicester again then? Seems to me that the people ordering that don't think it is as important as they ought to.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
17,693
Location
0035
Is there a danger of people in Leicester that were planning on going shopping or elsewhere to enjoy themselves, not travelling to nearby towns and cities (of which there is no shortage)?
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
248
I think it's a bit unfair to say that school aren't considered important at the moment though.
Why close the schools in Leicester again then? Seems to me that the people ordering that don't think it is as important as they ought to.
Exactly.

Not so long back: "Even missing half a day of school will seriously impact your child's future".
Today: "So they've missed six months? Who cares?"
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
248
Is there a danger of people in Leicester that were planning on going shopping or elsewhere to enjoy themselves, not travelling to nearby towns and cities (of which there is no shortage)?
Yes there is, but it's ok because the police in surrounding areas have said they'll fine / arrest anyone who does.

What they haven't said is under what law. Because there isn't one.

As our society gradually collapses, law enforcement agencies are making things up as they go along.
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
752
The new normal?


Michael Esken was visibly struggling to find the right words. On Friday last week, the mayor of the small town of Verl had come to visit a cordoned-off social housing estate. A fence had been put up around the blocks, guarded around the clock by security staff. Six hundred and fifty people, including 60 children, were sealed inside. Such is the tough reality of the measures required to impose a local lockdown, the strategy now being used in Germany to suppress new outbreaks of coronavirus.]Michael Esken was visibly struggling to find the right words. On Friday last week, the mayor of the small town of Verl had come to visit a cordoned-off social housing estate. A fence had been put up around the blocks, guarded around the clock by security staff. Six hundred and fifty people, including 60 children, were sealed inside. Such is the tough reality of the measures required to impose a local lockdown, the strategy now being used in Germany to suppress new outbreaks of coronavirus.
 

Top