So, local lockdown for Leicester, seems to be a fact It will be very interesting to see how successfully it can be managed as I don’t think there’s much doubt there will be similar local outbreaks elsewhere in future.
Worrying that even a couple of days ago, the Mayor of Leicester, a former MP, seemed to be resisting and playing it down somewhat. Then again, I keep saying we shouldn’t believe anything we read or see on news media, so who knows what discussions really took place.
Sympathies and thoughts to all who are affected, by the lockdown or by the virus itself.
I am only going to make one post on this, as I know I might upset some people with my thoughts been a supposed CT.
I have read the document issued by public health england in June, it shows the data for Leicester and some other areas leading up to the local lockdown.
It shows the following.
Leicester had a rising number of cases (R above 1 slightly). However other LA's it was compared to had very similar R ratings, with also rising cases. So this wouldnt justsify it been picked out.
Leicester had a higher then average amount of cases per 10k population, and per test, the per 10k population is the one that was triple over the 2nd highest area, the per test was only a bit higher.
The wards showing the increase in case count are the one's near the mobile test centre's the wards with no access to test centre's show low static numbers. (including my ward).
The author of the document, acknowledged the high test count per 10k was very likely down to the high levels of testing. However obviously that didnt account for the higher than average case per test.
The BBC has had many articles quoting ministers claiming Leicester has a triple infection rate vs the second highest area, this is inaccurate, I dont know if this deliberate misinformation from the government or someone has just messed up. I have been in touch with east midlands BBC over the past 2 weeks and they have finally read the document, and said they going to put it on a radio show for discussion, I asked about correcting the national news, they said that will only happen if its deemed newsworthy enough.
The problem been is they havent normalised the data to take into account for the amount of testing, the amount of testing in Leicester right now is at insane levels, door to door testing, able to use walk in testing with no symptoms, and on top of that the testing is been concentrated in the hotspots, its in effect a manipulated system in terms of the results. There is 12 mobile testing units in the entire country and 8 of them are in Leicester.
Also we have the lockdown borders, these appear to be political. Leicester has one of the weakest economies in the Country, the city is very Labour dominant. So the political and economical damage of lockdown is minimal. Most people are only concerned with their own well being. A couple of tory areas are been released from lockdown on the 18th, when you look at the borders drawn up its nonsense, they are deciding if you in lockdown based on who the council is, not the proximity to a hotspot or actual infection rates. Meanwhile the football ground is still able to host football games and children (super spreaders) have been authorised to go back to school on the 24th.
I know it sounds CT, but the source of my data is a government document, as to why they want to keep an entire city in lockdown when only small parts of it have hotspots? I think its a social experiment, and also to send a warning to other LA's that if they dont be proactive in tackling hotspots the government may lock them down, we are the example. They are now doing extreme levels of testing which will be probably be useful data for PHE, as it was always an unknown as to how many people with symptoms are carriers, all this testing provides that data, in addition they are able to test public reaction to local lockdown's. Next week there is a law been passed allowing them to forcefully prevent people from travelling (this is the one I hate), and shop closures etc. It is funny these laws were not passed during national lockdown.
Resident of the city are approaching 5 months of lockdown.
Now what about the reason for the hot spots?
Leicester as I said is a very deprived city, it has high levels of immigration population, lots of low paid workers, over crowded housing (very extreme housing problems in the city, worst in the country), and sweatshop garment factories. So far according to public data, there has been very little action to target any of these things, the only thing that is been done is extreme levels of testing, the testing will find people who have covid, but it wont prevent spread. No factories have been shutdown, very few have even been visited, nothing is been done about over crowded housing, and very little action against unauthorised shops. The emphasis seems to be just on testing and passing future laws to prevent people from leaving the city.
In addition no financial schemes have been extended for this extended lockdown. People cannot get back on furlough e.g if they were taken off it.
I am attaching a graph as to what I think is happening.
Yellow area = population, red line = unconfirmed cases (considered clean), purple area and line = confirmd cases via pillar B testing (lots of this in Leicester), black line Pillar A cases (hospital testing), simply put I think Leicester has a bit higher cases, but most of this 300% amount is just more of the unconfirmed cases becoming confirmed.
