Forum Topic

Covid-19 infections increasing in LB Hounslow - see link

http://www.chiswickw4.com/default.asp?section=community&link=http://neighbournet.com/server/common/ldrshouns024.htmLatest figures show 201.1 per 100,000, an increase from 177.1 on the previous week.  Therefore, is it wise, sensible and safe to allow the Flower Market on 6/12 and Antiques Market on 13/12 to go ahead ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2161d23 Comments

You're dying to tell us, so please do so.

Roger Talbot ● 2161d

Loraine, it's accepted that the PCR test is unreliable; so much so, its inventor said it should never be used for such tests; so it's important that we know how reliable it is to be able to make any sense of the figures - certainly before businesses and cities are shut down off the back of PCR test results; so what is the false positive rate?

Michael Brown ● 2161d

Hounslow seems to be stuck at about #11 in the London Borough League Table, while Ealing, which was once top, is falling steadily and is now at #10. We need a bit of healthy local rivalry to see who can get their rate down fastest.Come on Hounslow, don't let Ealing fall below us!

Susan Kelly ● 2161d

I would say its too soon to have large gatherings of people in a small area. I would also mention the figures quoted are already out of date.Since then the figures for hounslow have dropped to 180 per 100,000 and that is up to the 23rd nov. Hotspots in Hounslow appear to be Hounslow west and Heston areas.Parts of Chiswick looking at gov.uk figures were almost half of that. We have to be careful with the dates on theses figures.Knowing that does it change anybody views !

Paul Jennings ● 2161d

Michael,It's accepted that the PCR test gives false positives/negatives. It is more than sufficiently reliable to indicate whether the infection rate is rising or falling.It's also true to say that the PCR test doesn't in isolation say anything about whether a person who has been infected, is infectious themselves at the point the test was taken.I'm more than happy to put my faith into bodies like the ONS who know how to interpret the figures, knowing full well that there are such things as false positives etc.It's not important for me for you to know/be told the information as I doubt you'd say you believed what you were told anyway.

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

Of course it should. The second iteration of this event clearly learnt from the inaugural market and was well run and no more risky than walking down any high street.Of course we need to continue to exercise caution, but this needs to be balanced with keeping struggling businesses afloat and mental health concerns.

Chris Jenkins ● 2161d

I tend to agree with Chris, especially his last sentence.If everything was locked down right now I'd probably think differently, but it isn't and this is just part of an incremental attempt at re-opening things.We need to find the right point between shut everything down and open everything up and let the virus do its worst.But of course other people feel more cautious, I think you're one of them Loraine, and you probably don't think it should open just yet, and I hope that (in this case) your caution proves to be unnecessary.Maybe my viewpoint is coloured by the fact that I've been working in the centre of town throughout, so the jump in risk that having the markets represents doesn't feel significant to me.Regardless of whether that's a factor, stay safe.

Andrew Jones ● 2161d

For comparison's sake, I can tell you the open-air market we do adjacent to Granary Square is in Camden. There the council has limited customers to two shoppers per stall. There are 18 stalls. Assuming each stall has two people working (the majority have one person per stall) the total number allowed in the market at any one time is 72.

David Lesniak ● 2161d

AndrewI was just asking the question, I know that 2 of my friends believe they were unlucky enough to get Covid-19 as a result of attending November's Flower Market, having said that they are not certain.I do support these initiatives, but can't attend as I'm Type 1 Diabetic with a heart condition.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2161d

I agree with Chris, Andrew and David's comments too.  I think each person has to be responsible for themselves and make up their own minds as to whether or not it's safe to visit etc.  As a highly vulnerable person I try and keep well away from endangering myself or anyone else too.  I feel so sorry for those companies, pubs especially and all businesses who have made such enormous efforts to protect their customers and staff.  It is vital for these places to trade.  As for the performing arts, again they're an essential and creative part of our lives.  Youngsters striving to be educated are also deeply affected - these are the country's, the World's future - we old lot have had our days!  We owe it to them to keep out of harm's way and where ever possible stop blocking up hospital beds and services.  Our local councils especially Ealing and Hounslow could make it so much easier if they removed these mad traffic schemes.  I had to made an emergency call for assistance with my oxygen supply late yesterday afternoon.  The poor engineer who finally arrived said these restrictions had added hours of travel time to his day out rescuing people like me, in dire straits!

Jennifer Selig ● 2161d

Hi Loraine,Thanks - I was answering the question you asked with my reference to agreeing with what Chris had written. Plenty of people on this forum write 'I agree with ...' or one liners in a similar vein.I'm sorry to hear about your friends, I hope they have recovered. They might indeed have got infected at the market in November but like you said they aren't certain.I know someone whose son (and his son's group of friends) all caught COVID after going to Cheltenham Festival and one of them died from COVID. At the time I didn't think it was the right decision that the Cheltenham Festival should have been allowed to go ahead, given how little we knew back then, but I suspect given that the entirety of the group got infected, that attending Cheltenham was the extremely likely cause.  I'm not surprised you support the market initiatives in Chiswick, they seem a good way of re-invigorating Chiswick, but given your medical condition I'm sure you're staying away and if I was in your position, I'd be completely the same.Stay safe.

Andrew Jones ● 2160d

AndrewThank you for your thoughtful words, and I will be staying away from both markets, as much as I'd like to attend.However, I also think about the wider communities.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2160d

Chiswick has got the lowest rate compared to the other wards within the Hounslow Borough.  It will be very unfortunate for Chiswick if Hounslow is downgraded to Tier 3.  Chiswick should just break off from Hounslow and join Hammersmith & Fulham Borough.

Anthony Tan ● 2160d

When the current figures were announced by the Government  for the number of Covid cases, I entered the first 3 figures of my postcode as requested and up came the figures for Hounslow.  I then emailed Hounslow Council to ask for a breakdown by ward.  By return they said the figures by Ward  were not available!  Secrets secrets!  How did you manage to get the figure for Chiswick?

Jennifer Selig ● 2160d

Well, well well..I'm surprised and delighted to see U-turns by some who (only a month ago) were industrially campaigning for the flower market to be cancelled. Chiswick will hugely benefit from brilliant initiatives like Flower and Antique markets..Personally I might well not risk going along just yet.  I might attend but it will depend on the weather and extent of the crowds.  But thank goodness everyone is free to make their own decision.Roll on the vaccine....

Stuart Kerr ● 2160d

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-mapFor more detailed breakdown by area

Allison Lorimer ● 2160d

Go to this Gov link:  https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-mapExpand the map with focus on London area and then zoom in again into Chiswick area.  You can see more than half of Chiswick is already in Green.  Add the number of existing cases of each part belonging to Chiswick including Bedford Park.  This is how you get the existing total number of cases for Chiswick.

Anthony Tan ● 2160d

I monitored this map on a regular basis following the first flower market which was over promoted and badly managed on the day. There was no spike in infections in the Chiswick area. In fact the number of cases remained relatively low compared to other areas. The next market had a lower level of turnout and was better stewarded. Chiswick remains below the London and borough averages for infections.All these decisions have to balance economic and health risks. The evidence suggest the additional health risk of holding these markets is limited. The economic damage inflicted on the Chiswick retail sector by both the pandemic and council policies is not. Therefore I believe that if established local retailers think the markets will help, then they should go ahead.

Paul Corcoran ● 2160d

Businesses need to be open just be sensible and if vulnerable or elderly decide for yourself if it's better to stay away.  Also at Christmas if not absolutely necessary to meet with other household then don't, do what's right for you.  Stay safe.

Janice Evans ● 2159d

"It is more than sufficiently reliable to indicate whether the infection rate is rising or falling.”That’s not necessarily true, Andrew. The PCR test is known to give false positives but, as far as I’m aware, no-one has provided credible information on the percentage rate of false positives. What is known, is that the more the test is amplified, the less accurate it is. When high positive rates are given for a particular area, does anyone question the amplification for those particular tests? My understanding is that the amplification is generally too high, and for a test that is known to be unreliable at any rate. There are probably other factors too. Considering the small number of positive test results required per 100,000 to enable the government to shut down businesses, cities and lock people up, the test needs to be reliable, and it isn’t. 

Michael Brown ● 2158d

Correct, businesses do need to open. Hardly fair that 20 odd police can gather in a group laughing with no masks on outside Honest Burger getting there dinner and stores like Sainsburys can be open when little stores have to suffer. Those small stores just have be responsible to which I know they would given that they already were in  the first place.

chris poole ● 2158d

Michael,I'm aware that if you change the amplification i.e. number of cycles then you will get more positives, and will get a higher number of false positives. I expect you'll get less false negatives but I'm quite prepared to accept that the increase in false positives resulting from increasing the cycles exceeds the decrease in false negatives.But the key point is whether there is any suggestion that the number of cycles has been increased. Has there? If it hasn't then the validity of the test is comparible and it is sufficiently reliable to determine a rising or falling infection rate.I prefer to consider the ONS data, rather than just the number of positive tests being reported every day by the way.

Andrew Jones ● 2158d

Precisely, we don't know what cycles are being relied upon for any given test. All we know is that the test is unreliable and wasn't even invented for testing purposes. It's not fit for purpose, especially when considering the extreme and damaging decisions that are being made off the back of it. If the government didn't want to cause so much damage, they would say that the PCR test was too unreliable to base such decisions on, but when asked about the accuracy, they look the other way. We're seeing nothing but a script being played out.

Michael Brown ● 2158d