Anyone live in Leicester? The lockdown there has been extended.

but matt hancock mentioned that schools in leicester would have to close as children were particularly affected.
many people have queried this.
but i don't remember hearing a convincing explanation.

Less people are dying because it’s mainly older people who are badly affected.

Probably means more younger people are getting the virus, which isn’t at all surprising given the marches, raves, street parties etc.

Bradford and Barnsley may have to go into lockdown too.

Forgot the link:

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/government-finally-releases-greater-manchester-18496597

I think so. Andy Burnham has just published the figures for Manchester. Apparently, the level of those who have tested positive in Manchester is six times higher than thought.

It's silly really because if the death rate is decreasing, while the number testing positive is increasing, it means that the percentage dying from the virus is lower than thought, which is a positive thing.

It all sounds a bit like Trump, who wants to stop testing, so the numbers go down.

Many thanks to growstuff for explaining this is about numbers testing positive, not deaths.

Are all Mayors and local public health directors going to see the Pillar 2 figures from now on?

Johnson claimed the government knew about the spike in Leicester on 8 June but "unfortunately it did not prove possible to get the results seen elsewhere". Errrmmm ... why not?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53244626

You can bet that Leicester won't be the only city to experience a surge like this.

It's absolutely essential that local authorities have real time data if schools and other places are going to operate safely. They need the power to lockdown almost immediately to contain the spread.

Sad that a whole city is paying the price for the irresponsible behaviour of a smaller number.

This article in the FT explains what's happened:

www.ft.com/content/301c847c-a317-4950-a75b-8e66933d423a

The government has been publishing the full national totals, but not the regional data. It also explains why the statistics for Wales have been more accurate than in England.

Ooops! Not DfE ... I meant DHSC (Department of Health and Social Care).

Sparklefizz

If you look at the photos of the inside of the factories in Leicester that have stayed open pretty much all through lockdown and defied the advice .... and if you read the quotes from the factories' owners that they will continue to do this ...... then it's all fairly clear why Leicester has had this spike in infections.

It's all available online.

Yes, it is. The Leicester local papers were the first to break the stories and it's been picked up by the national media.

The factory owners need to have the book thrown at them (and more). They've endangered the health of their employees, caused a whole city to shut down and (if they've been claiming furlough money) defrauding the taxpayer too.

Illte

No, I still don't get it. Ive looked at yesterday's email and and it quite clearly states number of pillar 2 tests carried out, the numbers of each type and the positive results.

Do you mean the local results weren't available?

The government was forced to change after last Thursday. Until then the headline figures provided were only the Pillar 1 results and a footnote about Pillar 2 results. In the beginning, most of the positive tests were coming from hospitals, so Pillar 2 wasn't that important, but this has changed over time.

Andy Burnham has been going on about it for ages and so have some other local council leaders, but nobody was responding. Last week, Soulsby's argument was that Leicester's test results weren't that bad, but he was shown the Pillar 2 results and realised what the real situation was.

If you look at the photos of the inside of the factories in Leicester that have stayed open pretty much all through lockdown and defied the advice .... and if you read the quotes from the factories' owners that they will continue to do this ...... then it's all fairly clear why Leicester has had this spike in infections.

It's all available online.

Ramblingrose Local death registration details are at least two weeks behind the NHS's figures.

However, this isn't about deaths. This is about positive tests and infection rates. In fact, the Leicester death rate and hospital admissions haven't shown a huge jump because most of the people infected (so far) are youngish and have recovered.

The issue was with the private providers of tests. The government (DfE) knew the overall results, but weren't informing the local public health authorities or mayors. Whether that's incompetence or deliberate hiding of facts, I have no idea.

I am curious as to why local authorities don't know about the Covid-related deaths in their area.

I thought that each has a registrar for deaths (as well as births and marriages) who record the death and issue the death certificate so if it says "Coronavirus" on the death certificate they will know.

I don't know exactly how this works but maybe they are not allowed to record the causes of death separately and keep that data. Does anyone know how this works?

No, I still don't get it. Ive looked at yesterday's email and and it quite clearly states number of pillar 2 tests carried out, the numbers of each type and the positive results.

Do you mean the local results weren't available?

Yes growstuff I agree, we all need the correct information.

The Pillar 1 and Piller 2 graphs are very worrying. How on earth can anyone assess the level of risk in their own area with this type of information available, or indeed not available?

I don't excuse it maddyone but it's a distraction. It's not relevant to the fact that he and other mayors haven't been given the data they needed and had asked for.

I don’t understand the glossing over of Leicester’s Mayor’s behaviour by some posters, whilst the behaviour of Neil Ferguson and Dominic Cummings behaviour was quite rightly slated.

The government's data for my area showed for a few days that there no infections, but I knew that was rubbish. The KCL tracker data showed that 1 in 200 people had symptoms and I even knew two people who had tested positive.

There's a small footnote stating that the data you received was only the Pillar 1 data (ie those tested in hospitals) but it doesn't explain what that means in practice.

I'll take another look.