Local lockdown in Greater Manchester, East Lancashire and parts of West Yorkshire - Discussion

30907

Established Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
9,105
Location
Airedale
Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that Bradford has gone from 25/100,000 to 35/100,000. How many measurements is that determined from, we'd need around 10,000 tests to even be able to detect such a small difference, and much more to be able to say that it's not simply an artefact of random sampling.
Pretty intensive testing round here and a consistent if gentle (ca 10% pw) upward trend.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
3,712
Location
Nottingham
Pretty intensive testing round here and a consistent if gentle (ca 10% pw) upward trend.
Maybe, but I still struggle to see how we could detect that with any certainty, using less than... 50k tests in Bradford alone. To get similar sensitivity across the whole vast domain that restrictions are being imposed on would probably require the entire testing capacity of the UK for a week.
 

SteveM70

Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
668
Erm, isn't that why many are collecting details so they can do exactly that?
That’s the theory, but it isn’t really workable in big and/or busy pubs is it? The average city centre spoons will have over a hundred people an hour go through it, and because they don’t record who sat where or accurate departure times they can’t be confident who an infected person came into contact with.

And that assumes people give their real contact details
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
5,007
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that Bradford has gone from 25/100,000 to 35/100,000. How many measurements is that determined from, we'd need around 10,000 tests to even be able to detect such a small difference, and much more to be able to say that it's not simply an artefact of random sampling.
These are not actual numbers, but forecasts.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
54,829
Location
Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
That’s the theory, but it isn’t really workable in big and/or busy pubs is it? The average city centre spoons will have over a hundred people an hour go through it, and because they don’t record who sat where or accurate departure times they can’t be confident who an infected person came into contact with.

And that assumes people give their real contact details
Spoons certainly are taking the mick and may well find themselves re-closed quite quickly as a result if this kicks off. It really does require people to stick to their table - that, or the whole pub has to self-isolate for one case.
 

island

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
10,822
Location
0036
Unless I have missed it, and I rarely do, no regulations have been published that implement the restrictions in Greater Manchester, East Lancashire, and West Yorkshire which the government purported to impose by Twitter on Thursday night. Is this another crafty attempt to avoid judicial review like in last month’s case where they successfully argued that schools were never required by law to close, only “advised” to?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
54,829
Location
Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
Unless I have missed it, and I rarely do, no regulations have been published that implement the restrictions in Greater Manchester, East Lancashire, and West Yorkshire which the government purported to impose by Twitter on Thursday night. Is this another crafty attempt to avoid judicial review like in last month’s case where they successfully argued that schools were never required by law to close, only “advised” to?
No, they will be imposed, they just haven't done it yet. Monday I think?
 

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,343
Unless I have missed it, and I rarely do, no regulations have been published that implement the restrictions in Greater Manchester, East Lancashire, and West Yorkshire which the government purported to impose by Twitter on Thursday night. Is this another crafty attempt to avoid judicial review like in last month’s case where they successfully argued that schools were never required by law to close, only “advised” to?
I certainly can't find any evidence of them on the legislation.gov.uk site, despite looking at the list of UK SIs and manually looking up SIs by number (e.g. currently 2020 No. 820 is neither listed or published but clearly is allocated as there's a No. 823). I don't imagine they will totally refrain from introducing restrictions, but perhaps they are 'conveniently' delaying this until after Eid, to avoid any potential judicial review against claimed Islamic discrimination.
 

duncanp

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
951
Location
Birmingham/Smethwick
I live in the Borough of Sandwell in the West Midlands, which has just been put on Public Health England's list of "areas of concern".

The infections are highest in and around Smethwick and West Bromwich, but two thirds of the wards in Sandwell have no infections at all.

The local council found out that the main sources of the outbreak were a factory in West Bromwich, and large multi generational households, from ethnic minority communities, many of whom did not speak English very well, if at all.

So the council hired some contact tracers who could speak Urdu, Punjabi, Hindi, and several other Asian languages, and sent them out into the community to speak to them, explain the rules, and tell them how to get a test if they have symptoms.

In the week or so since they did this, the infection rate has dropped by nearly 50%, so it is a good example of a local authority taking simple, targeted and effective measures, using their local knowledge.

Whether this approach would work in Lancashire and West Yorkshire depends on the exact causes of the outbreak there.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
839
I live in the Borough of Sandwell in the West Midlands, which has just been put on Public Health England's list of "areas of concern".

The infections are highest in and around Smethwick and West Bromwich, but two thirds of the wards in Sandwell have no infections at all.

The local council found out that the main sources of the outbreak were a factory in West Bromwich, and large multi generational households, from ethnic minority communities, many of whom did not speak English very well, if at all.

So the council hired some contact tracers who could speak Urdu, Punjabi, Hindi, and several other Asian languages, and sent them out into the community to speak to them, explain the rules, and tell them how to get a test if they have symptoms.

In the week or so since they did this, the infection rate has dropped by nearly 50%, so it is a good example of a local authority taking simple, targeted and effective measures, using their local knowledge.

Whether this approach would work in Lancashire and West Yorkshire depends on the exact causes of the outbreak there.
Really interesting.

I hope that it can be done elsewhere and that it works.
 

jtuk

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
172
I live in the Borough of Sandwell in the West Midlands, which has just been put on Public Health England's list of "areas of concern".

The infections are highest in and around Smethwick and West Bromwich, but two thirds of the wards in Sandwell have no infections at all.

The local council found out that the main sources of the outbreak were a factory in West Bromwich, and large multi generational households, from ethnic minority communities, many of whom did not speak English very well, if at all.

So the council hired some contact tracers who could speak Urdu, Punjabi, Hindi, and several other Asian languages, and sent them out into the community to speak to them, explain the rules, and tell them how to get a test if they have symptoms.

In the week or so since they did this, the infection rate has dropped by nearly 50%, so it is a good example of a local authority taking simple, targeted and effective measures, using their local knowledge.

Whether this approach would work in Lancashire and West Yorkshire depends on the exact causes of the outbreak there.
Very good post and exactly what we should be doing
 

duncanp

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
951
Location
Birmingham/Smethwick
Really interesting.

I hope that it can be done elsewhere and that it works.
And closing the pubs in Sandwell wouldn't have made any difference to controlling this outbreak.

In fact it would have been counter productive, as people living in Sandwell would have travelled to Dudley, Wolverhampton and Birmingham to have a drink, and people travelling from an area with an outbreak to one which doesn't have an outbreak is the last thing you want to happen.

SAGE scientists who want to close pubs so that schools can re-open "safely" please note.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
839
And closing the pubs in Sandwell wouldn't have made any difference to controlling this outbreak.

In fact it would have been counter productive, as people living in Sandwell would have travelled to Dudley, Wolverhampton and Birmingham to have a drink, and people travelling from an area with an outbreak to one which doesn't have an outbreak is the last thing you want to happen.

SAGE scientists who want to close pubs so that schools can re-open "safely" please note.
Well given they were talking about national restrictions, I don't think that applies.

(And I think people might be be making a bit too much of the "pubs" comment).
 

duncanp

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
951
Location
Birmingham/Smethwick
Well given they were talking about national restrictions, I don't think that applies.

(And I think people might be be making a bit too much of the "pubs" comment).
Point taken.

If there is an increase in infection rates after schools re-open, you would have to find out the cause and deal with it appropriately.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
839
Point taken.

If there is an increase in infection rates after schools re-open, you would have to find out the cause and deal with it appropriately.
Yes but if the cause is the schools, it doesn't mean the answer has to be to close schools again.
 

duncanp

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
951
Location
Birmingham/Smethwick
Yes but if the cause is the schools, it doesn't mean the answer has to be to close schools again.
I think much of the risk in opening schools is that if one child is infected, they can spread it to other pupils in the same class, who can then spread it to pupils from other classes.

So there needs to be COVID secure guidelines for schools, such as

  • The smallest class size possible, given resource constraints
  • Pupils from one class not allowed to mix with other pupils
  • Staggered start, meal and break times.
  • Advice on social distancing and hygiene
  • A rolling programme of mass testing for schools, whereby a mobile testing unit visits the school and everyone gets tested.

Closing pubs again is unlikely to be the answer to an increase in infection rates after schools re-open, given that schoolchildren don't generally go to pubs, unless it is with their parents for a meal.

As with pubs, if someone at a particular school tests positive, the school may have to close for a few days for cleaning, and everyone at the school should be contact traced.

To get back more on topic, a "major incident" has been declared in Greater Manchester over rising coronavirus infection rates.



A major incident has been declared in Greater Manchester amid a rise in coronavirus infection rates.

Gold command meetings of senior figures from the police, local authorities and other agencies have been taking place over the weekend, according to the Manchester Evening News.


A statement to Sky News from assistant chief constable Nick Bailey, chairman of the Local Resilience Forum, said: "Recognising that there are multiple localities across Greater Manchester seeing rises in infection rates, the group reviewed learning from other recent areas, including Leicester, and its own learning from across the partnership, and have taken the decision to declare this a major incident in order to respond as effectively as possible.

"This will enable us to maximise the capability of agencies across Greater Manchester, including additional resources if required, to instigate a prompt and positive change in direction.

"It is part of our desire to protect the population of Greater Manchester and provide them with the highest levels of assurance that agencies are doing all they can to reduce infection rates and bring Greater Manchester back to as near a state of normality as current times allow."



Major incidents are often declared after a terror attack or major flood and mean a region can access extra national resources if necessary.

If the police need extra help in enforcement, the MEN reports, it is understood the army could be drafted in to support them.
 

island

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
10,822
Location
0036
A new regulation (SI 2020/824) has been published particularising the new requirements as respects Leicester, and including a ban on gatherings in a private household other than for members of one household, their bubble, and the usual exemptions. Probably we will see something similar for the other advertised local lockdowns.

I am too tired to read it again or type up the latest infringements on civil liberties rushed in without parliamentary scrutiny, but I am sure other members can make up for me.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
839
Closing pubs again is unlikely to be the answer to an increase in infection rates after schools re-open, given that schoolchildren don't generally go to pubs, unless it is with their parents for a meal.
That's not the point. The point is that if opening schools increases transmission, to keep infection levels constant some other source of transmission has to be taken away.

Schools are a particularly dangerous one in principle, as they make lots of connections between families, many of whom of course have children in different classes or even different schools.

Is it just me, or did that article not actually say very much about what declaring it a major incident would actually achieve?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
23,937
Location
Yorks
That's not the point. The point is that if opening schools increases transmission, to keep infection levels constant some other source of transmission has to be taken away.

Schools are a particularly dangerous one in principle, as they make lots of connections between families, many of whom of course have children in different classes or even different schools.



Is it just me, or did that article not actually say very much about what declaring it a major incident would actually achieve?
According to the BBC:

BBC said:
It allows the establishment of a central command structure to oversee the response and enables agencies involved to draw on extra resources.
 

Mag_seven

Established Member
Associate Staff
General Discussion
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
6,549
Location
here to eternity
According to the BBC:



In other words its just a device that allows extra support to be drafted in. Of course it suits the media because they can use big scary terms ("Major Incident" in this case) that makes good headlines.
 

_toommm_

Established Member
Joined
8 Jul 2017
Messages
3,371
Location
Headingley
I think much of the risk in opening schools is that if one child is infected, they can spread it to other pupils in the same class, who can then spread it to pupils from other classes.

So there needs to be COVID secure guidelines for schools, such as

  • The smallest class size possible, given resource constraints
  • Pupils from one class not allowed to mix with other pupils
  • Staggered start, meal and break times.
  • Advice on social distancing and hygiene
  • A rolling programme of mass testing for schools, whereby a mobile testing unit visits the school and everyone gets tested.

Closing pubs again is unlikely to be the answer to an increase in infection rates after schools re-open, given that schoolchildren don't generally go to pubs, unless it is with their parents for a meal.

As with pubs, if someone at a particular school tests positive, the school may have to close for a few days for cleaning, and everyone at the school should be contact traced.

To get back more on topic, a "major incident" has been declared in Greater Manchester over rising coronavirus infection rates.

It’s no surprise with the amount of scrotes who frequent Piccadilly Gardens day in and day out with their varying ailments. Even in the full lockdown through the spring months, they’d be there reliably whilst I was off to work at 7am (not homeless mind you, just very heavy drinkers and drug takers) until late in the evening.

Whilst talking to staff at Piccadilly in lockdown, they’ve told tales of people travelling into Manchester for the most incessant of reasons (one stand out example for me was to buy a chicken at a slightly cheaper price, having travelled from Hyde).

It’s an absolute farce for me so now because of some selfish individuals I now have to face over a three hour commute in the morning, instead of staying at my parents’ overnight.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
23,937
Location
Yorks
In other words its just a device that allows extra support to be drafted in. Of course it suits the media because they can use big scary terms ("Major Incident" in this case) that makes good headlines.
Indeed. There's presumably a pot of funding somewhere that they can access.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
54,829
Location
Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
There was no civil unrest when Easter was cancelled during lockdown.
Easter isn't really that major a festival[1]. It's Christmas that is going to pose a very major challenge.

[1] If you're Christian it's more important than Christmas, but most people in the UK who celebrate Christmas aren't really Christian, it's just a family celebration.
 

Top