By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
So I know Burnham is against the move to Tier 3 status due to the financial help not being enough but he's gone really strong on it, virtually driving a north/south wedge on the issue. He today cited decreasing cases which is true (490 per 100k down from 540) but they are still very high (London is on about 120) and it's also quite a simplistic way of looking at things given unknown numbers of tests and people not testing.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 14:52 - Oct 19 by StokieBlue
If the peak has past why are the hospitals about to run out of capacity (as per the original link)?
That chart is also skewed by university positives a few weeks ago, it would be interesting to see the graph without that factored in.
As an aside and solely playing devils advocate:
If it's not right to impose tier 3 on Manchester as is Burnham's position how is it right that he insists on imposing a lockdown on the country which would include places like Suffolk which has less than 1/10th the cases of Manchester?
For the record I am not saying he is wrong, I think we will go for a national lockdown but doesn't Suffolk then become the next Manchester complaining about restrictions?
The worry is that the standoff will mean more people in hospitals which will mean they reach capacity and then people start dying because the NHS is stretched.
SB
That original link is based on a continued upward surge, which is not being seen in the figures... see the end of this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54594885 - for a bit more analysis, but the takeaway was:
"Hospitals in the North West are incredibly busy, but talk of them being overwhelmed with Covid patients is somewhat premature."
On your point about imposing national restrictions for local outbreaks... that's exactly what happened for the 1st lockdown - we had a national lockdown, because london and the south east had high rates.... as soon as they dropped down south, he pulled the national lockdown ( too early for the NW, which is one of the reasons that the rates shot back up).
But again, you're missing the point - if anyone thought tier 3 would actually help, they'd be more likely to go for it - but all its going to do is hit more businesses.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:17 - Oct 19 by SaleAway
That original link is based on a continued upward surge, which is not being seen in the figures... see the end of this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54594885 - for a bit more analysis, but the takeaway was:
"Hospitals in the North West are incredibly busy, but talk of them being overwhelmed with Covid patients is somewhat premature."
On your point about imposing national restrictions for local outbreaks... that's exactly what happened for the 1st lockdown - we had a national lockdown, because london and the south east had high rates.... as soon as they dropped down south, he pulled the national lockdown ( too early for the NW, which is one of the reasons that the rates shot back up).
But again, you're missing the point - if anyone thought tier 3 would actually help, they'd be more likely to go for it - but all its going to do is hit more businesses.
The lockdown started to be eased 10th May. The rise in NW began in September.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:17 - Oct 19 by SaleAway
That original link is based on a continued upward surge, which is not being seen in the figures... see the end of this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54594885 - for a bit more analysis, but the takeaway was:
"Hospitals in the North West are incredibly busy, but talk of them being overwhelmed with Covid patients is somewhat premature."
On your point about imposing national restrictions for local outbreaks... that's exactly what happened for the 1st lockdown - we had a national lockdown, because london and the south east had high rates.... as soon as they dropped down south, he pulled the national lockdown ( too early for the NW, which is one of the reasons that the rates shot back up).
But again, you're missing the point - if anyone thought tier 3 would actually help, they'd be more likely to go for it - but all its going to do is hit more businesses.
Thanks for the link.
On your final sentence, you said this in your previous post:
"2. tier 3 restrictions won't address the main issues, which are school, university and in-home transmissions."
Doesn't tier 3 does address in-home transmission by banning all mixing of households? Universities are already supposed to be teaching remotely in most cases and evidence seems to suggest primary schools aren't driving transmission. Certainly agree that older kids could be driving transmission in secondary schools though.
If London was at the same number of cases as Manchester I would be expecting it to be moved to Tier 3 - it's been moved to Tier 2 with similar cases as Bournemouth which is Tier 1.
SB
0
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:37 - Oct 19 with 646 views
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:26 - Oct 19 by Pinewoodblue
The lockdown started to be eased 10th May. The rise in NW began in September.
and your point is?
lockdown was eased - and there was still a reasonably high prevalence of covid around the NW - but as schools and universities weren't open, it didn't explode. Hospitality was open, people were going about their business, and covid was still around but not out of control.
September saw the schools and universities go back, and the rate start to go crazy. There's a fairly clear causative link there. But instead of addressing that, they want to shut hospitality businesses.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:30 - Oct 19 by StokieBlue
Thanks for the link.
On your final sentence, you said this in your previous post:
"2. tier 3 restrictions won't address the main issues, which are school, university and in-home transmissions."
Doesn't tier 3 does address in-home transmission by banning all mixing of households? Universities are already supposed to be teaching remotely in most cases and evidence seems to suggest primary schools aren't driving transmission. Certainly agree that older kids could be driving transmission in secondary schools though.
If London was at the same number of cases as Manchester I would be expecting it to be moved to Tier 3 - it's been moved to Tier 2 with similar cases as Bournemouth which is Tier 1.
SB
Manchester has been living with in-home mixing banned since July. Its still banned in tier 2.
but if you have kids - you have a strong chance of bringing it into your home.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:37 - Oct 19 by SaleAway
and your point is?
lockdown was eased - and there was still a reasonably high prevalence of covid around the NW - but as schools and universities weren't open, it didn't explode. Hospitality was open, people were going about their business, and covid was still around but not out of control.
September saw the schools and universities go back, and the rate start to go crazy. There's a fairly clear causative link there. But instead of addressing that, they want to shut hospitality businesses.
Can you explain why cases have risen more sharply in sme area than in others. Have a sixth form college 300 yards from here 2,000 pupils we just two reported cases. (Caveat.. as of last week)
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:55 - Oct 19 by Pinewoodblue
Can you explain why cases have risen more sharply in sme area than in others. Have a sixth form college 300 yards from here 2,000 pupils we just two reported cases. (Caveat.. as of last week)
[Post edited 19 Oct 2020 16:01]
Not without more underlying data - not really - but I can have a stab.
1. depends on the underlying rate of covid in the area. 2. depends on the socio-economic demographics of the area ( its not coincidence that less affluent areas are getting hit harder, where more people are living in confined areas) 3. Depends how people get to/from college ( driven by parents, or have to take public transport) 4. Depends on how effective the particular colleges/schools are at implementing safe learning policies.
I'm not sure what you're driving at really. What this all boils down to - is the government wanting to implement a set of rules on Manchester, that their own medical/science advisors have said is not the right approach, and the local leaders, who will see the fallout from this in terms of unemployment, poverty, crime, etc etc asking for a plan to mitigate for that, or if we're going to have to cause such hardship, perhaps do it for something like a proper lockdown, which might actually make a material change to what is already happening.
The view is that tier 3 has a disproportionally large downside for the likely effect it will make.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 14:52 - Oct 19 by StokieBlue
If the peak has past why are the hospitals about to run out of capacity (as per the original link)?
That chart is also skewed by university positives a few weeks ago, it would be interesting to see the graph without that factored in.
As an aside and solely playing devils advocate:
If it's not right to impose tier 3 on Manchester as is Burnham's position how is it right that he insists on imposing a lockdown on the country which would include places like Suffolk which has less than 1/10th the cases of Manchester?
For the record I am not saying he is wrong, I think we will go for a national lockdown but doesn't Suffolk then become the next Manchester complaining about restrictions?
The worry is that the standoff will mean more people in hospitals which will mean they reach capacity and then people start dying because the NHS is stretched.
SB
Because hospital admissions lag behind because hospital stays can be a couple of days or a couple of weeks. Some people infected before the peak might go into hospital next week.
Manchester tier 3 issues on 17:04 - Oct 19 by Kievthegreat
Because hospital admissions lag behind because hospital stays can be a couple of days or a couple of weeks. Some people infected before the peak might go into hospital next week.
That is fair and we won't know for a number of weeks as you've said.
I still think it's very early to be discussing any "peaks" though.
SB
0
Manchester tier 3 issues on 15:23 - Oct 20 with 490 views
Looks like BoJo is getting in some more no deal practice...
Can't help but feel that this negotiation has been doomed from the start.... as far as I can tell, neither side has budged... which makes you think, if the governement weren't willing to negotiate, why wait all this time before imposing tier 3...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
