Maybe if the gov imposed the regulations they laid out instead of just talking a good job but acting on nothing we might have seen no local lockdowns and in fact a national lockdown lifted sooner
4 regions of Yorkshire in the top ten places for infections per 100k population so at risk of a lockdown (Bradford, Barnsley, Doncaster, Kirklees) and yet we've got the lowest R rate in the country. How's that work? If keeping the R low is so important, then why is our county in danger of getting shut like Leicester.....
Yorkshire is a big place, but the population is heavily concentrated in a few areas - Leeds/Bradford and Sheffield/Rotherham account for about half the population alone. Where is that map from? Last figures I saw showed R>1 in several areas including the South West and London.
That was on The Sun website yesterday. I can't see the article now but they have this one..... https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12002...-below-1-england-creeping-threshold-midlands/ Of the places with a low of 0.5 we are the only place with an high that's as low as 0.8.
I'd be interested where they got them from. The official government figures were last updated on the 25th and have Yorkshire at 0.7-0.9 - Only the North West (0.7-1.0) and South West (0.6-0.9) are different in England. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-number-in-the-uk But, the daily death rate has increased over last week, which implies an increase in infection and cases (R>1) in at least some parts of the UK about 3 weeks ago...
Of course, if we’d been allowed to go ahead with our plans to develop into a Tuscan village, we wouldn’t have had this problem