THe said the number of chrono virus infections was increasing across the UK, but until recently cities in the north of England felt like London was smoldering but not catching fire when it was burning like a powdered cage. However, the announcement that a second level of restraint (high alert level) will be issued in the capital from Saturday has raised the possibility that the people of London will not be able to survive the second wave.
Infection rates in London’s 12 boroughs have already exceeded 100,000 per 100 cases; Richmond tops the list at 140th place.
Some scientists have suggested that former hotspots may be less affected than the second time due to a higher rate of resistance or a changed behavior pattern. Others think it is only a matter of time before the capital is seriously re-ignited.
Here are some of the leading theories about the differences between the regions of Britain in the rate of Kovid-19 infection.
If enough people prevented the virus from spreading freely, creating the immunity of the Stork-Cavi-2, Londoners could breathe a little more easily. However, the animal’s level of immunity to this coronavirus is estimated at 60% of the population, and according to the latest Public Health England data, only 1 17.5% of Londoners have antibodies.
Some people may have T-cell resistance that can be produced independently of antibodies. It is also possible that some pockets in London have higher levels of antibodies than others, but it is also less likely to achieve animal immunity levels.
“My reading tells me that animal immunity cannot be achieved without vaccines,” said David Alexander, a professor at the Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction at University College London.
London has a large number of white-collar workers and a relatively small number of people in manufacturing, retail and wholesale jobs compared to other parts of the UK. Many office workers can and do work from a distance.
James Cheshire, UCL’s professor of geographic information and cartography, says not everyone can become self-sufficient by working from home, but the move may be enough to reduce the rate of infection.
There is very little congestion and mixing in public transport. Analysis of patterns of public activity by Cheshire and his colleagues found that people were still traveling significantly less in central London than before the lockdown, with other cities coming closer to normal in such movements.
“I think the interesting question for London is that the mix that is going on in families is the current increase in the cases we are seeing,” he said. If this is the case, then level 2 restrictions, which prohibit indoor socialization, can have a significant impact.
Londoners are more cautious about socialization
Although the initial distance was to comply with social distance guidelines across the UK, perhaps Londoners, concerned by the high coronavirus infection rate in the spring, later became more cautious about visiting public spaces such as restaurants, shopping centers, museums and theaters.
Anonymous data collected by Google from apps such as Google Maps shows that visits to these sites in Mirside and Greater Manchester have dropped by 30% and 31% compared to January 2020, respectively, while in Greater London they have dropped by 39%.
However, Alexander, a professor at UCL, noted that despite greater public prudence in Italy, the country was once again growing dramatically in the Covid-19 case.
Greater deprivation in northern England
Among the poorest in England, more than half of the worst-hit areas are Birmingham and Manchester; In Liverpool it is close to two-thirds. It has been established that people in poor areas are more likely to be infected with juicy-COV-2.
Muge Sevik, a virologist at the University of St Andrews, said: “Low-wage and public-facing occupations are often classified as essential workers for those who have to work outside the home and can go to work on public transport.” Jobs and financial insecurity may make people less inclined to comply with social restrictions, while overcrowded families may find it more difficult to become self-separated.
“People say viruses don’t discriminate,” said Callum Semple, a pediatric respiratory consultant at Alder Hay Children’s Hospital in Liverpool. This is a fundamental misconception – viruses discriminate against the most vulnerable segments of our society. “
London has extreme deprivation and overflowing crowds. But Richard Harris, a professor of quantitative social geography at the University of Bristol, said: “London has been able to adapt differently to the nature of jobs and the wealth of some people. [compared with] Other areas. “
It was uncertain whether it was enough to buffer the capital against the full blow of the second wave. “Things are in their favor, but I don’t think we can take it lightly,” Harris said. “Also, although the capital itself can withstand the full blow of the second wave, I’m not sure anyone can say the same about everything inside the capital. There are people in London who are just as vulnerable as in other cities. ”
The time of the end of the lockdown limitation
Another possibility is that during the national lockdown, infection rates in northern English cities were never as low as in London and the south, so if these restrictions were relaxed, the northern region would re-emerge. An analysis by Public Health England found that some areas of Manchester, Bolton, Oldham and Rochdale did not really survive the epidemic despite the imposition of social restrictions.
Less impact from the virus in some cities
Cities in south-west England avoided significant first waves and remained relatively low in the case of known infections until recently. Relatively low population densities, poor public transport infrastructure and proximity to rural areas were all possible explanations.
“Bristol is also a rich enough city and it’s largely self-contained, so it can’t pull in the same number of people as the cities of the Midlands or London,” Harris said.
Bristolians, however, should not be complacent. The city’s infection rate is now rising even higher and it has 120 new cases per 100,000 people. “It has an element of randomness, because all you need is a super spreader event in a town and it can be a big problem in your hands very soon if you don’t find it soon,” Harris said.