Connect with us

Main News

Almost half of Britons could be less likely to catch Covid-19 because they have Type O blood

Published

on

almost half of britons could be less likely to catch covid 19 because they have type o blood

People with blood type O could be less likely to get sick with Covid-19, according to new research.

Their risk of severe complications such as organ failure — and even death — is also reduced, say scientists.   

Danish researchers used data from 473,000 individuals tested for Covid-19 against a control group of more than 2.2million people from the general population. 

Among those who tested positive for the virus, they found fewer people with blood type O and more people with A, B, and AB types.  

Results from a second study also suggested individuals with blood types A and AB, who collectively make up just under 45 per cent of the UK and US populations, are at higher risk of having severe symptoms and complications — such as the need to be ventilated — than than those with type O or B.

The findings build on a growing body of research suggesting a link between blood type and coronavirus risk, as well as the apparent protective effect of blood type O. Around half of people in the UK and US have type O blood. 

People with severe coronavirus and genes that code for Type A blood were 50% more likely to need oxygen or ventilator support, compared to those with other blood types (stock image of the coronavirus in the blood)

People with severe coronavirus and genes that code for Type A blood were 50% more likely to need oxygen or ventilator support, compared to those with other blood types (stock image of the coronavirus in the blood)

Lead author of the first study, Dr Torben Barington, of Odense University Hospital, said: ‘It is very important to consider the proper control group because blood type prevalence may vary considerably in different ethnic groups and different countries.’

His team tested 196,252 people with blood type O and 277,402 with types A, B, or AB.

Whilst 38 per cent of people who tested positive for Covid-19 had type O blood, 62 per cent had type A, B or AB blood. 

The majority of people in the latter group (202,507) had type A blood, with far fewer having type B (53,735) or AB (21,160). 

Rates of infection in these last three groups were similar at around 1.6 per cent, compared to 1.4 per cent for those with blood type O. 

The trends remained the same after the researchers took into account ethnicity, which affects blood group distributions. 

What have some of the studies into blood type and Covid-19 shown?

When? March

By who? Chinese scientists from multiple institutions

What did scientists study? 

2,173 people who had been diagnosed with coronavirus, including 205 people who died after contracting the virus, from three hospitals in Hubei. 

Academics compared the data of the infected Wuhan patients with 3,694 non-infected people in the same region.   

What did they find?  

That people with type A blood are significantly more likely to catch coronavirus than those with Type O blood. 

They also found that people with type A blood are more likely to die from Covid-19.   

What were the study’s limitations? 

The researchers pointed out that a larger study group would make the figures more reliable. 

The findings did also not explain the mechanisms that show whether a person with blood type A is more susceptible to the Covid-19 disease.      

When? June

By Who? Genetic testing company 23AndMe, based in the US

What did scientists study? 

750,000 participants, including 10,000 people who reported having Covid-19. 

Researchers identified a variant in the ABO gene, responsible for difference blood types, that was associated with a lower risk. 

What did they find? That having a certain blood type may help protect you against coronavirus.

People with type O blood were up to 18 per cent less likely to test positive for Covid-19. 

About 1.3 percent of 23andMe research participants with type O blood tested positive for COVID-19.

By comparison, 1.4 percent of those with type A blood and 1.5 percent of people with type B or type AB blood were confirmed to have the virus.

What were the study’s limitations?   

At the time of publication, the findings had not been peer reviewed or published in a medical journal.    

When? June

By Who? Scientists in Italy, Spain, Denmark, Germany and other countries 

What did scientists study? Analysed the genetics of Covid-19 patients. 

They compared about 2,000 patients with severe COVID-19 to several thousand other people who were healthy or who had only mild or no symptoms.

Researchers tied variations in six genes to the likelihood of severe disease, including some that could have a role in how vulnerable people are to the virus. They also tied blood groups to possible risk.

What did they find? Those who had Type A blood were more likely to have severe disease while those with Type O were less likely.  

What were the study’s limitations? 

 A small sample size and the urging of caution by other scientists.

One, Dr Eric Topol, head of the Scripps Research Translational Institute in San Diego, said the evidence of a role for blood type is ‘tentative…it isn’t enough of a signal to be sure.’     

When? June

By Who? University of Kiel in Germany

What did scientists study? 

DNA samples from Italian and Spanish patients who went into respiratory failure after contracting coronavirus.

They sequenced the genomes of 1,610 patients from seven hard-hit cities in the two countries.

They searched for patterns in these genomes, common themes in the genetic variation that might point a DNA basis for the predisposition of these patients to fall life-threateningly ill.

By comparing these genomes to those of 2,205 people who did not become severely ill, the researchers homed in on two points along the genome.

The more notable of the two gene areas they identified was one that codes for people’s blood types.

What did they find? 

The gene variant that underlies Type A blood was much more common among severely ill COVID-19 patients.

People who had Type A blood were 50 percent more likely to be so sick they needed oxygen support or even to be put on a ventilator.

Type O blood, on the other hand, was linked to a lower probability of severe illness.

What were the study’s limitations?  

 Small sample size.

Researchers still don’t know for sure what about this gene variant that leads to Type A blood would make someone more susceptible to coronavirus. 

Advertisement

A slightly higher proportion of black people (51 per cent) have type O blood than in the white population. 

The authors concluded that ‘blood group O is significantly associated with reduced susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection’.

A second study of 95 critically ill Covid-19 patients in hospital in Vancouver found the A and AB blood types were at higher risk of severe symptoms than those with O or B.

They were more likely to require mechanical ventilation, suggesting they had greater rates of lung injury from the virus, and dialysis for kidney failure.

Whilst 61 per cent of people with blood types O or B needed to be mechanically ventilated, 84 per cent of people with blood types A or AB needed the life-saving treatment.  

It suggests these two blood groups have an increased risk of organ dysfunction or failure due to Covid-19.

What’s more, while people with blood types A and AB did not have longer overall hospital stays, those who were admitted to intensive care spent longer in the units than people with other blood groups.

This may also signal a greater Covid-19 severity level, said the Canadian team.

Lead author Dr Mypinder Sekhon, of the University of British Columbia, said: ‘The unique part of our study is our focus on the severity effect of blood type on Covid-19.

‘We observed this lung and kidney damage, and in future studies, we will want to tease out the effect of blood group and Covid-19 on other vital organs.

‘Of particular importance as we continue to traverse the pandemic, we now have a wide range of survivors who are exiting the acute part of Covid-19, but we need to explore mechanisms by which to risk stratify those with longer-term effects.’ 

As the pandemic continues, the global biomedical research community is working urgently to identify risk factors and potential therapeutic targets.

The potential role of blood type in predicting infection has emerged as an important scientific question.

The papers, published in the journal Blood Advances, add to evidence of a link.

There are four main blood groups — A, B, AB and O.  

The difference in blood groups depends on attachments to red blood cells called antigens. 

The presence, or absence, of these molecules dictates what blood type a person is.

Antigens may let the virus into the body and blood type O has no antigens, whereas all other blood groups do.  

The second most common blood group in the UK is A, which accounts for just under 40 per cent of the UK population.

Far less common are groups B (around 10 per cent of the population) and AB (three per cent).

Professor Mypinder S Sekhon, the author of the second study, said: ‘The unique part of our study is our focus on the severity effect of blood type on Covid-19.

‘We observed this lung and kidney damage and in future studies we will want to tease out the effect of blood group and Covid-19 on other vital organs.

‘Of particular importance as we continue to traverse the pandemic, we now have a wide range of survivors who are exiting the acute part of Covid-19, but we need to explore mechanisms by which to risk stratify those with longer-term effects.’

Earlier this year, a study of more than 2,000 coronavirus patients in China found of the 206 who died, 85 had blood type A – equivalent to 41 per cent of all deaths.

It also showed they were more vulnerable to infection and tended to develop more severe symptoms. Those with blood type O had a ‘significantly lower risk’ of getting the disease.

The Chinese team urged medics and governments to consider blood type differences when treating patients with the virus and helping prevent the spread of the disease.

Advice is still to wash your hands and follow the guidelines issued by authorities – whatever your blood type.

And in June, researchers at genetic testing company 23andMe found that people with type O blood were up to 18 percent less likely to test positive for Covid-19.

Additionally, those who had the blood type, and had been exposed, were up to 26 percent less likely to contract coronavirus.

Previous research commissioned by London mayor Sadiq Khan and carried out by Manchester University academics highlighted how black people were nearly twice as likely to die from Covid-19 than white people.

However, experts believe BAME communities have been hit harder by Covid-19 because ethnic minorities are more likely to be poorer and therefore in worse health, and more likely to work in public-facing jobs — leaving them vulnerable to catching the illness.

Public Health England, which found a similar risk of death for BAME people in a long-awaited report published in June, warned historic racism and the hostility towards immigrants was partly to blame.

Dr David Valle, director of the Institute of Genetic Medicine at John Hopkins University, previously said that blood type has been linked in the past to susceptibility to diseases including cholera, and recurrent urinary tract infections from E.coli.

Blood type has been linked in the past to increased susceptibility to diseases. 

A 1977 study found that people with blood type O were actually more likely to become infected with cholera. 

And the authors of a 1993 study suggested that people with type O blood were more likely to become infected with Helicobacter pylori bacteria, which causes stomach bugs and ulcers.    

BAME BRITONS ‘ARE FOUR TIMES MORE LIKELY TO HAVE HAD COVID-19’ 

Black and Asian Britons are up to four times more likely to have had already fought off the coronavirus, official data suggested in the summer.

A government-run surveillance scheme, which tested 36,000 people across England, revealed 4.5 per cent of white people had developed antibodies — substances created by the immune system in response to specific pathogens.

In comparison, the rate was 12.2 per cent for Asian Brits, 7.7 per cent for black people and as high as 16.7 per cent for other ethnic groups, according to the report by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Results of swab tests — which tell if someone is currently infected and not if they have had it in the past — showed a similar discrepancy between ethnicity, with between 0.64 and 0.69 per cent of black and Asian people ever testing positive for the coronavirus.

Just 0.30 per cent of white people swabbed between April 26 and June 27 tested positive for the disease.

Results also showed that the risk was nine times higher (2.69 per cent) for people of other ethnic groups, which included Arabs. 

Statisticians warned the findings do not prove for certain that people of BAME backgrounds are at greater risk of being infected.

But they add to the mountain of evidence that has found people of BAME backgrounds are more likely to catch Covid-19 and become seriously ill or die from it than white people.

Advertisement

This post first appeared on dailymail.co.uk

Main News

Suspected killer of estate agent was ‘spotted hurling large suitcase into canal after she vanished’

Published

on

By

suspected killer of estate agent was spotted hurling large suitcase into canal after she vanished

The suspected killer of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh was spotted hurling a large suitcase into a canal in west London three days after she vanished, a retired detective has revealed.

Ms Lamplugh, 25, disappeared 34 years ago, it is believed after going to meet a client who called himself ‘Mr Kipper’ in Fulham, south west London.  

Killer John Cannan, 66, is currently serving three life sentences at Full Sutton Prison in York after being convicted of murder, attempted kidnap and rape in 1988.

He has never been charged in connection with Ms Lamplugh’s murder, but is believed to have told a former girlfriend that he strangled her and buried her body in concrete.

Now former detective superintendent Jim Dickie, who was in charge of a re-investigation into the case, says he was told last year that Cannan was seen dumping a big trunk into the Grand Union Canal in Brentford. 

Killer John Cannan, above, 66, is currently serving three life sentences at Full Sutton Prison in York

He has never been charged in connection with the murder of Suzy Lamplugh (above)

Killer John Cannan (left), 66, is currently serving three life sentences at Full Sutton Prison in York but has never been charged in connection with the murder of Suzy Lamplugh (right)

Former detective superintendent Jim Dickie says he was told last year that Cannan was seen dumping a big trunk into the Grand Union Canal (pictured above) in Brentford, west London

Former detective superintendent Jim Dickie says he was told last year that Cannan was seen dumping a big trunk into the Grand Union Canal (pictured above) in Brentford, west London

A lorry driver is said to have witnessed the scene while on his way to work at 5am, three days after Ms Lamplugh vanished.

Cannan was alleged to be seen with the suitcase on a trolley, and ran away after a splashing sound was heard.

Mr Dickie told The Sun: ‘I believe the canal sighting is the best piece of information to have emerged about Suzy’s potential whereabouts since she went missing more than 34 years ago.’

Cannan was jailed for life with a minimum of 35 years in April 1989 for the rape and murder of Shirley Banks, 29, in Bristol. 

The former detective drew similarities between the two cases, noting that Ms Banks’ body was found in a rural location near a main road, while the Grand Union Canal is close to the A4 and M4. 

 He added: ‘We think that after leaving the bail hostel, Cannan had a room somewhere where he took Suzy and murdered her before hiding the body.

‘There were warehouses around that area at the time where he could easily have got a trolley.’

Ms Lamplugh’s car was found in the evening on the same day she disappeared, parked in a Fulham street a mile from the house, with its handbrake off but with her purse still in the door pocket. 

Police activity in July last year on a roadside verge adjoining a field near Pershore, Worcestershire, in connection with the murder of the estate agent 34 years ago

Police activity in July last year on a roadside verge adjoining a field near Pershore, Worcestershire, in connection with the murder of the estate agent 34 years ago

Six years later, the Metropolitan Police revealed its prime suspect in the case to be serial rapist and convicted killer Cannan – but the Crown Prosecution Service ruled there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. 

Ms Lamplugh was officially declared dead, presumed murdered, in 1994 and her parents Paul and Diana both died without finding out what happened to their daughter.

The estate agent’s disappearance is one of the most puzzling cases of the 20th century.

Witnesses reported seeing a woman meeting her description arguing with a man outside a property in Shorrolds Road at about 1pm on July 28, 1986.

In August 2010, police began searching a field off the B4084 between Pershore and Drakes Broughton, about three miles from the former Norton Barracks in Worcestershire, where a search had previously been carried out in December 2000 and February 2001.

In December 2000, police had also searched a nearby brickworks, which had been mentioned in several of the original witness statements.

Suzy Lamplugh: Timeline of one of the UK’s most notorious cold cases

July 28 1986: Ms Lamplugh leaves her estate agency office in Fulham, west London, at 12.40pm to meet a client called Mr Kipper. At 10pm, her white Ford Fiesta is discovered in Stevenage Road, Fulham. The doors are unlocked, the handbrake is off and the ignition keys are gone. Her purse, still containing £15, is in the pocket of the driver’s door. A massive police hunt is launched. 

December 1986: The Suzy Lamplugh Trust is set up by Suzy’s parents, Paul and Diana Lamplugh, to tackle violence and support stalking victims.

October 1987: With few leads, the police inquiry into the disappearance is closed. The file remains open.

April 1989: John Cannan is jailed for life with a minimum of 35 years for the murder of newlywed Shirley Banks in Bristol. He is also sentenced for a rape and an attempted kidnap.

February 1994: Ms Lamplugh is officially declared dead, presumed murdered.

December 1999: Her mother receives new information from a secret source claiming her daughter’s body could be within the grounds of abandoned Army barracks at Norton, Worcestershire. Scotland Yard says the information is not new but orders a review because of the complex twists in the case.

December 4 2000: Cannan is questioned in prison in connection with the kidnap and murder of Ms Lamplugh. No charges are brought.

December 11 2000: Officers begin a fingertip search of a disused brickworks and a surrounding copse and lake near Norton Barracks in Worcestershire. Investigators return to the scene several times but are not thought to have made significant developments.

June 14 2002: Police submit a new file to the CPS to examine if there is enough evidence to prosecute a suspect.

November 5 2002: Mr Lamplugh speaks of his ‘anger and frustration’ at news the CPS will not charge Cannan, citing insufficient evidence.

December 2002: Reports first surface that Ms Lamplugh may be buried in the garden of the West Midlands home previously owned by the suspect’s mother, Sheila. There is talk of excavating the garden in Sutton Coldfield but Jim Dickie, the detective superintendent leading the investigation at the time, later confirmed his officers did not dig or perform an ‘extensive’ search of the home.

August 2010: Police end their search in a meadow between Pershore and Drakes Broughton in Worcestershire with no remains found.

August 18 2011: Mrs Lamplugh dies aged 75 after suffering a stroke.

June 12 2018: At the age of 87, Mr Lamplugh dies after living with Parkinson’s disease. His death ends hopes that the parents may see justice for their daughter.

October 29 2018: Investigators led by the Metropolitan Police return to Cannan’s mother’s former home in Shipton Road, Sutton Coldfield, to prepare to excavate its garden in the hope of ending the 32-year mystery.

November 2 2018: Cannan reiterates his innocence in the case, saying through his solicitor that he hopes the search of the property will conclude swiftly to ‘end speculation’ that he was responsible.

November 12 2018: The ‘painstaking’ two-week search of the garden finds no evidence. Police insist the case remains open.

July 3 2019: Police begin searching land in Pershore, Worcestershire following new information about the disappearance.

Advertisement

This post first appeared on dailymail.co.uk

Continue Reading

Main News

Jaffa Cakes bombshell: McVitie’s reveal chocolate is on the BOTTOM

Published

on

By

jaffa cakes bombshell mcvities reveal chocolate is on the bottom

For a small inoffensive treat, Jaffa Cakes can cause a lot of debate.

Is it a biscuit? Is it a cake? Should you eat it all in one or nibble off the edge before the jelly?

These are questions asked in households across the UK, and while theses questions may always remain a mystery, McVitie’s has baffled fans by putting an end to one debate.

The Edinburgh-biscuit company have revealed the chocolate is actually on the bottom of the Jaffa Cake, contrary to popular belief. 

In a screenshot of a Twitter conservation shared widely on UK Facebook groups, McVitie's appear to have confirmed that chocolate goes on the bottom of a Jaffa Cake

In a screenshot of a Twitter conservation shared widely on UK Facebook groups, McVitie’s appear to have confirmed that chocolate goes on the bottom of a Jaffa Cake

UK social media user known as David claims to have asked the Jaffa Cake team to confirm which side of the treat is the top via Facebook messenger.

In screenshots that have since been shared widely, they said: ‘Hi David, our Jaffa Cakes go through a reservoir of chocolate, so the chocolate is the bottom, Thanks Jaffa Cake’ to which David quickly replied: ‘WTF’.

The post was then shared to the Facebook group Family Lockdown Tricks and Tips, where many disagreed with the news.

‘Lol no really not accepting this. The cake part is the bottom,’ said one.

McVitie's have previously weighed in on the debate, revealing that it's not just Jaffa Cakes but all their sweet treats that have the chocolate on the bottom

McVitie’s have previously weighed in on the debate, revealing that it’s not just Jaffa Cakes but all their sweet treats that have the chocolate on the bottom

‘Omg that’s like eating a ham salad sandwich with the ham on the bottom and salad on top. All wrong,’ added another.

”I refuse to accept this,’ said a third.

‘The bad news just keeps on coming. What a year,’ a fourth wrote.

35071092 8899861 image a 14 1604135858273

35071088 8899861 image m 13 1604135847843

35071084 8899861 image m 11 1604135832924

35071080 8899861 image m 5 1604135744542

35071082 8899861 image m 9 1604135817023

Users also took to Twitter to share their shock, with one writing they were 'horrified' at the news.

Users also took to Twitter to share their shock, with one writing they were ‘horrified’ at the news.

‘Their own advert shows choc side up on the plate!’ a fifth noticed. 

Users also took to Twitter to share their shock, with one writing they were ‘horrified’ at the news. 

McVitie’s have previously weighed in on the debate, revealing that it’s not just Jaffa Cakes but all their sweet treats that have the chocolate on the bottom.  

35071078 8899861 image a 17 1604135939348

The post was then shared to the Facebook group Family Lockdown Tricks and Tips , where many disagreed with the news

The post was then shared to the Facebook group Family Lockdown Tricks and Tips , where many disagreed with the news

Marketing director Kerry Owens previously told MailOnline: ‘When we make our McVitie’s chocolate biscuits – whether that be Chocolate Hobnobs, Chocolate Digestives, or even Jaffa Cakes – they go through a reservoir of chocolate on the production line.

‘This essentially “enrobes” the bottom in chocolate – so we can confirm that the chocolate is officially on the bottom of the biscuits.’ 

FEMAIL has contacted McVitie’s for comment.  

This post first appeared on dailymail.co.uk

Continue Reading

Main News

Coronavirus cases are falling in ALL of Liverpool’s local authorities

Published

on

By

coronavirus cases are falling in all of liverpools local authorities

Infections are dropping across Liverpool’s six local authorities, official data reveals, in a clear sign that Tier Three restrictions are driving the city’s outbreak into reverse.

Department of Health data shows infection rates fell by between nine and 15 per cent over the three days between a week after the harshest measures were imposed and October 23, the latest date for which figures are available.

Experts argue infection rates should be compared from a week after Tier Three restrictions are imposed to establish whether they are having an impact because it takes at least five days for a person infected with coronavirus to develop symptoms.

Restrictions in Liverpool saw the shutters pulled down on bars, cafes and pubs not serving substantial meals, bans on mixing in households and gyms and leisure centres forced to bolt their doors. But on October 23 fitness centres were allowed to reopen following negotiations with the Government. 

Of the city’s six local authorities – Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool City, Sefton, St Helens and the Wirral – only St Helens had an infection rate above the level it was at when lockdown was first imposed.

It is still too early to tell whether Tier Three restrictions have had an impact in Lancashire, as the infection rate is only available for the first week that the measures were in force – but all of its local authorities have a downward trend in infections. Nonetheless, only seven of its 14 local authorities have rates below the level they were at when restrictions were imposed on October 17. 

It can take the Government up to a week to calculate infection rates because of a mounting backlog of swabs in labs. The rates are calculated based on specimen dates – the day a test was taken – meaning it can take several days for all the data to become available.

Scientists warned it was difficult to tell what impact Tier Three restrictions were having in Liverpool because the Government does not release data on the number of tests done by local authority – which would reveal whether fewer swabs are being completed in the areas triggering the fall. But it is thought this situation is unlikely as swabs are normally directed to outbreak areas, which receive priority.

Infection rates across Liverpool's six local authorities have started to fall ten days after Tier Three was imposed

Infection rates across Liverpool’s six local authorities have started to fall ten days after Tier Three was imposed

Almost 60 per cent of the population – around 32.6 million – will be under stricter rules by Monday

Almost 60 per cent of the population – around 32.6 million – will be under stricter rules by Monday

LIVERPOOL, CITY OF: Infections in the centre declined by 15 per cent compared to their levels a week after Tier Three was imposed. Experts said infections should be considered from this point because it takes up to a week for someone who is infected to develop symptoms of the virus

LIVERPOOL, CITY OF: Infections in the centre declined by 15 per cent compared to their levels a week after Tier Three was imposed. Experts said infections should be considered from this point because it takes up to a week for someone who is infected to develop symptoms of the virus

KNOWSLEY: This local authority was once the UK's coronavirus hotspot, but it recorded the second fastest decline in infections in Liverpool ten days after Tier Three restrictions were imposed

KNOWSLEY: This local authority was once the UK’s coronavirus hotspot, but it recorded the second fastest decline in infections in Liverpool ten days after Tier Three restrictions were imposed

HALTON: Infections in Halton have also begun to decline in response to the tightened measures in the city

HALTON: Infections in Halton have also begun to decline in response to the tightened measures in the city

LIVERPOOL’S CHANGING FORTUNES: TIER THREE IS WORKING, SAYS DATA

LOCAL AUTHORITY

LIVERPOOL CITY

SEFTON

KNOWSLEY

HALTON

ST. HELENS

WIRRAL

INFECTION RATE ON OCTOBER 23

309.7

148.3

110.7

57.3

109.7

126.6 

% FALL AGAINST OCTOBER 21

-15%

-13%

-13%

-10%

-9%

-10% 

Liverpool’s Tier Three restrictions were launched on October 14, when the city became the first place in the country to experience the harsher measures

Advertisement

Liverpool was the first city in England to be plunged into Tier Three restrictions on October 14, and as such is the best measure of how well they are working.

A week after its restrictions came in three local authorities – Halton, St Helens and the Wirral – all recorded rises in their infections.

But after this deadline was crossed all local authorities started to register downward trends.

The biggest fall was in Liverpool City, where infections dropped 15 per cent from 365.7 to 309.7 cases per 100,000 people.

It was followed by Sefton and Knowsley, which both registered 10 per cent falls in infections to 148.3 and 110.7 per 100,000 respectively.

Only St Helens has an infection rate above the level when Tier Three was imposed – at 109.7 compared to 109 per 100,000 when Tier Three was first imposed.

In Lancashire Blackpool registered the biggest fall in infections, from 101.9 to 96.4 per 100,000.

It was followed by Lancaster, with a 15 per cent drop from 87.9 to 65.6 per 100,000, and Burnley, with a 11 per cent drop from 62.9 to 51.3 per 100,000.

The largest spike was in Hyndburn, where infections rose 20 per cent from 51.6 to 60 per 100,000.

It was followed by hotspot Blackburn with Darwen and Preston – where infections rose by 13 per cent in each region to 164.3 and 98.6 respectively.

The UK has previously received international praise for its Three-Tier approach to coronavirus restrictions.

Dr David Nabarro, from the World Health Organization, said this week the Government’s measures had been ‘very effective’ in some parts of the North of England.

‘Well the first thing to say is just how interesting the UK has been in apparently being able to slow the spread in some parts of the North of the country with very effective local action,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

‘But what’s that led to, is as you say, a sort of levelling up. And it seems like southern parts of the UK are speeding up.’

The South of England is seeing the highest rates of infection – with SAGE saying the R rate in London may have risen as high as three – meaning the region may soon be put under harsher coronavirus restrictions.

Tier Three restrictions have, however, come in for a roasting today amid warnings the Government could impose a second national lockdown across the country by Wednesday.

Percentage change in coronavirus cases across London in the week to October 25: The five local authorities where the infection rate grew the most are: Kingston upon Hull City, 92.81 per cent; Derby, 91.84 per cent; North Somerset, 82.99 per cent; Medway, 77.17 per cent; and Bath and North East Somerset 69.72 per cent

 Percentage change in coronavirus cases across London in the week to October 25: The five local authorities where the infection rate grew the most are: Kingston upon Hull City, 92.81 per cent; Derby, 91.84 per cent; North Somerset, 82.99 per cent; Medway, 77.17 per cent; and Bath and North East Somerset 69.72 per cent

Professor John Edmunds, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine who also sits on SAGE, slammed the Tier system today – and said the UK has been above their worst-case scenario prediction for several weeks.

‘Tier Three (is) probably slowing the growth a little bit but it isn’t stopping it, nevermind reducing it,’ he warned.

‘If you assume that Tier Three will hold the reproduction number of one that means that places that are in Tier Three not only have very high incidence, but will continue to have very high incidence for the forseeable future. Meanwhile, the rest of the country catches up.’

He added a second national lockdown could drive down cases enough to ensure families could enjoy Christmas together.

‘I think the idea of a lockdown is to save lives primarily,’ he argued, ‘and the only real way that we have to relatively save Christmas is to get the incidence rate right down’.

‘Otherwise, Christmas I think is very difficult for people and nobody wants to have a disrupted Christmas holiday period, where you can’t see your family and so on.

‘So I think the only way that that can be safely achieved is to bring the incidence rate right down and in order to do that we have to take action right now, and that action needs to be stringent unfortunately.’

Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, also slammed the Tier system this morning for failing to curb the spread of infections.

‘Doctors and scientists agree that none of the current restrictions have been enough to stop the virus spreading,’ he said.

‘Without a change, the NHS would have been overwhelmed within weeks and it would have been difficult if not impossible to cope in the winter months with the inevitable increase in caring for people with Covid-19 as well as non-Covid illnesses.’

He added: ‘The only way to get things back to normal quickly is to get the virus under control as soon as possible.

‘The measures being reported today, if implemented and respected, will reduce transmission, get R below 1 and reset us to an earlier stage of the pandemic.

‘This buys us time before we start to see treatments and vaccines in early 2021.’

Professor John Edmunds, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, criticised Tier Three today

And Sir Jeremy Farrar, from the Wellcome Trust, also said it did not go far enough

Despite the success Tier Three came in for a roasting today from Professor John Edmunds, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and Sir Jeremy Farrar, who heads up the Wellcome Trust

Infection rates in some Tier 3 areas are finally beginning to fall – but most are still facing rising figures, data shows. 

Liverpool, which entered the strictest Tier 3 lockdown on October 14, has seen a 21% drop in the rate of Covid infections in the most recent week, according to figures from Public Health England’s weekly surveillance report.

Recent data suggests the harsh restrictions — which ban socialising with anyone outside your own household and mean many businesses have to close — are beginning to work, but scientists say the true effect won’t be clear until a few weeks have passed. 

The city, along with Halton, Knowsley, Sefton, Sheffield and St Helens are among the Tier 3 areas that have seen a drop in the infection rate recently – but the majority of those hit by the harshest restrictions are still seeing rises in the rate of transmission. 

The rate in Liverpool from Week 43 (October 19-25) was still a worrying 462% – but this represents a drop of one-fifth from the 584% of the previous week, indicating that Liverpudlians may have finally passed the peak of this wave. 

St Helens in Merseyside, which went into Tier 3 on October 14, was another area to see a drop in the infection rate. The most recent week’s figure is 3.80% less than in the previous week – 421%, down from 437%, and still lower than the 443% in week 41 – the apparent peak.

The town suffered an explosion in the infection rate from 6% in week 35 (late August) to 50% in week 36.

Sefton, another October 14 lockdown, saw a drop of 12% in the weekly rate, and Sheffield, which entered Tier 3 on October 24, saw a small drop of 2% in the rate.  

Halton and Knowsley both entered Tier 3 on October 14, and each saw a drop of 7% and 18% respectively. 

Knowsley’s rate had exploded from 11% in week 35 to 51% in week 36 (early September), and kept increasing until an apparent peak in week 41 (early October) of 700%. The following week the rate was 663%, and the week after it was 542%.

While these areas spark hope for an end to the threat of Covid – and the draconian restrictions brought into to try and combat it – many areas now under the harshest lockdown are still facing explosive rises in infection rates. 

Blackburn with Darwen, which entered Tier 3 on October 16, has seen a 34.30% growth in the infection rate over the most recent week. The latest rate is a staggering 774%, up from 576% the previous week and 446% the week before.  

Doncaster, which was locked into Tier 3 on October 24, saw a 46% growth in the rate in the most recent week. The latest figure is 513%, up from 350% the week before, and 220% the week before that. 

TIER 3 AREAS THAT ARE SEEING IMPROVEMENTS – AND THOSE STILL STRUGGLING 

Below is a list of areas the entered Tier 3 restrictions before October 30, followed by when they entered Tier 3 (T3), and the most recent change in the weekly coronavirus infection rate: 

DECREASES:

Halton; entered Tier 3 (T3) on October 14; down 7.95% 

Knowsley; T3 on October 14; down 18.18%

Liverpool; T3 on October 14; down 20.98% 

Sefton; T3 on October 14; down 12.54%  

Sheffield; T3 on October 24; down 2.46%  

St Helens; T3 on October 14; down 3.80%  

INCREASES:   

Barnsley; T3 on October 24; up 9.12% 

Blackburn; T3 on October 16; up 34.30% 

Bolton; T3 on October 23; up 23.60% 

Blackpool; T3 on October 16; up 0.34%   

Bury; T3 on October 23; up 22.26% 

Doncaster; T3 on October 24; up 46.44% 

Lancashire; October 16; up 10.01% 

Manchester; T3 on October 23; up 10.75% 

Nottinghamshire; T3 on October 14; up 19.38% 

Oldham; T3 on October 23; up 41.22% 

Rochdale; T3 on October 23; up 12.81%  

Rotherham; T3 October 24; up 27.71

Salford; T3 October 23; up 18.88% 

Stockport; T3 on October 23; up 32.05% 

Tameside; T3 on October 23; up 38.41% 

Trafford; T3 on October 23; up 31.27%   

Warrington; T3 on October 27; up 16.67% 

Wigan; T3 on October 23; up 42.40%  

Wirral; T3 on October 14; up 5.78% 

Advertisement

The area had been under control for many weeks, with a rate below 10% for around two months – until an explosion in the rate around Week 36, with exponential growth ever since. 

Oldham, which only last week entered Tier 3 on October 23, still endured a brutal 41% growth in the infection rate in the most recent week – 662%, up from 469%.  

Experts have insisted that it is too early to tell if the tough measures have truly worked, but the figures will add to growing pressure for tougher lockdown rules to be used in the South, which has so far largely escaped anything harsher than the Tier One social distancing laws.    

Scientists warned infections are ‘speeding up’ in the South and a worrying Government-funded study by Imperial College London found that the outbreak appears to be growing fastest in London and the South West, where rules are comparatively lax. 

Although the situation is not as bad yet in the southern regions – there are fewer people testing positive or being admitted to hospital – ministers face growing pressure to act early and stop surging outbreaks before they become disastrous. 

Dr David Nabarro, of the World Health Organization (WHO), praised the UK Government’s decision to impose local measures, claiming they have been ‘very effective’ in some parts of the North.

But he warned in the South infections are ‘speeding up’ on BBC Radio 4, adding: ‘This will mean of course the Government in Britain, like other governments in Europe, will be thinking “do we need to have some sort of over-arching position in the country, with tougher restricions?”‘. 

Delays in processing Covid-19 tests mean it is only possible to see the impact of Tier Three up to October 21, the latest day for which local authorities infection rates are available. The infection rate has been released up to October 23 on the Government’s experimental website, but is yet to be finalised.

It comes after a Government-led study revealed the R rate – how many people an infected person spreads the virus to on average – has begun to decline in the North West, where millions are living under Tier Three curbs.

The rate may have dropped as low as 0.72 for the week ending October 25, the academics said, a significant decline from the previous week’s lowest value of 1.12 and the first sign the outbreak in the region may be falling. 

The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) has called for a new national lockdown to curb the spread of the virus, but Housing Minister Robert Jenrick today insisted the Government would avoid the potentially ruinous measure saying you ‘can’t stop-start a country’.

Lockdown critics have warned another one would be ‘catastrophic’ for the country and the ‘final nail in the coffin’ for many businesses that are ‘on their last legs’. 

Most of the authorities where epidemics have grown the most remain in Tier One, where only the rule of six and 10pm curfew apply. Scientists have argued these rules are not stringent enough to shrink the outbreak, with top Government advisers warning the current growth is ‘very bleak’.  

For example, North Somerset and Bath and North East Somerset, where cases jumped up 83 per cent and 70 per cent in one week, have yet to be hit by any tougher virus-controlling restrictions.  

Public Health England’s weekly surveillance report revealed only 20 of all 150 authorities in England saw a drop in infections last week, including Nottingham where cases dropped by 30 per cent. Despite the city’s outbreak shrinking, it will be thrown under the toughest Tier Three restrictions from tomorrow, along with the rest of the county.

WHERE DID THE INFECTION RATE GROW THE MOST? 

Kingston upon Hull, City of 92.81%

Derby 91.84%

North Somerset 82.99%

Medway 77.17%

Bath and North East Somerset 69.72%

South Gloucestershire 62.13%

Herefordshire, County of 58.10%

Derbyshire 57.98%

Stoke-on-Trent 56.79%

Lincolnshire 55.26%

Staffordshire 55.21%

Leicestershire 54.29%

Southampton 54.02%

Brighton and Hove 52.57%

Milton Keynes 50.88%

Swindon 49.99%

East Riding of Yorkshire 49.32%

Dudley 49.07%

West Sussex 46.89%

Leicester 46.57%

 

Advertisement

WHERE DID THE INFECTION RATE GROW THE LEAST? 

Nottingham -30.00%

Liverpool -20.98%

York -20.25%

Windsor and Maidenhead -20.09%

Knowsley -18.18%

County Durham -15.51%

Sefton -12.54%

Rutland -11.63%

Devon -11.12%

Camden -10.03%

Halton -7.95%

South Tyneside -5.35%

Hackney and City of London -4.60%

Richmond upon Thames -3.96%

St. Helens -3.80%

Hartlepool -3.68%

Slough -3.02%

Sheffield -2.46%

Leeds -1.22%

Newcastle upon Tyne -0.42%

 

Advertisement

Ministers are understood to analyse a ‘basket’ of indicators to make decisions on Covid-19 restrictions, including the infection rate, hospital admissions and speed of growth. 

Dominic Raab says Government is ‘ready’ for TIER FOUR COVID restrictions 

Dominic Raab today hinted the Government could introduce a new Tier Four set of even stricter coronavirus restrictions as he refused to rule out a national lockdown. 

The Government’s current local lockdown system is based on three tiers but there are fears that even the most draconian rules in Tier Three are not enough to stop the spread of the disease. 

A new Tier Four could see non-essential shops told to close and travel limited to getting to work and school. 

Mr Raab said the Government is ‘always ready for further measures’ as he insisted ministers intend to stick to their localised approach of cracking down on infections. 

But the Foreign Secretary admitted that both Germany and France had also used a strategy of local crackdowns before ultimately being forced into new nation shutdowns. 

He would only go so far as saying the Government is ‘striving to avoid’ following the UK’s European neighbours as he resisted imposing a ‘blanket approach or a blunt approach’. 

Mr Raab told the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme: ‘We are always ready for further measures that we can take but I think the most important thing about further measures is we continue on the track that we are on of targeting the virus.

‘The difference between now and the first lockdown is we are in a much better place to really focus on where the virus is the greatest and I think that is right, not only in scientific and virus management terms, I think in terms of the way people feel about tackling the virus it is fair, it fits the natural justice that we are focusing on the areas where the uptick is the greatest and we are not taking a one-size-fits-all approach or a blanket approach or a blunt approach.’

Mr Raab said the Government wanted to avoid the ‘arbitrariness of a blanket approach’ as he claimed the public favour targeted restrictions. 

However, he did not rule out eventually having to impose a national lockdown after France and Germany made the move earlier this week. 

He said: ‘You mention France. France of course tried a localised approach and then fell back on the national approach.

‘What I think that shows you, Germany is the same, is how important it is that we all rally together at local level through to national level, communities, local leaders, national leaders, and really lean in to the localised focused approach.

‘That is the most effective way to tackle the virus and avoid the blanket approach which I don’t think would be in the best interests of this country and which we are striving to avoid.’

Mr Raab said it is ‘crucially important’ to ‘carry the public with us’ and that he believed the Government’s tiered approach is the best way to do that. 

Advertisement

South Gloucestershire, in the south west, and Herefordshire in the West Midlands, also saw their outbreaks rapidly grow in the space of one week, by around 60 per cent. However, their infection rates are also lower than the national average and currently stand at 192 and 86, respectively.

The figures indicate the ‘second wave’ is now affecting all corners of England, and not just the north.   

Scientists warned this week infections are ‘speeding up’ in the south.

A worrying Government-funded study by Imperial College London found that the outbreak appears to be growing fastest in London and the South West, where rules are comparatively lax, and slowest in the northern regions with the toughest restrictions. 

They predicted the R rate — the average number of people each carrier infects — is also higher than two in the South East, East and South West, which have mostly escaped any tough local lockdowns.  

But the R rate in the capital is higher than anywhere else in England, at three. For comparison, the experts claimed the national R rate is around 1.6. Cases are doubling every three days compared to every nine days in the rest of England, the study claimed.  

The PHE data shows just 20 out of 149 councils recorded a fall in their Covid-19 infection rates in the week ending October 25. For comparison, 23 saw a dip the week before. 

A  number of large cities saw their infection rates drop in the week to October 25. This includes Nottingham (down 30 per cent), Liverpool (down 21 per cent), Sheffield (down 2.46 per cent) and Leeds (down 1.22 per cent).

But despite this, Nottingham and Leeds will be plunged into Tier Three restrictions this weekend. And there are no clear path for Liverpool and Sheffield to move out of their local ‘lockdowns’.

Liverpool, and the rest of Merseyside including Halton, Knowsley, Sefton, St Helens and Wirral, went straight into Tier Three when the tiered system came into force on October 14. All those places saw infection rates drop in the most recent week, other than Wirral, where cases only rose by 6 per cent. 

A number of places under Tier Two also saw drops in infection rates, including York (20 per cent), South Tyneside (5 per cent) and Newcastle upon Tyne (down a slight 0.42 per cent).

Parts of London — Camden (down 10 per cent), Hackney and City of London (down 4.60 per cent) and Richmond upon Thames (down 3.96 per cent) — also saw improvements in infection rates. These areas have some of the highest infection rates in London, suggesting that residents have acted to control the coronavirus.

But it’s understood London could be thrown into Tier Three lockdown within two weeks unless infection rates drop significantly across the whole capital. 

Londoners are currently banned from meeting indoors with anyone they don’t live with. 

However London Mayor Sadiq Khan is piling on pressure on No10 to drag the city into Tier Three, despite infection rates varying across the 32 different boroughs – from 223 positive tests per 100,000 people in Ealing over the most recent week, to 103 per 100,000 in Lewisham. 

It comes after the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) reportedly said this week all of England could be in Tier Three lockdown by mid-December if a national lockdown is not adopted before.

They said virus rates all over the country will soar past the levels seen in areas already put into the ‘very high’ category by the festive season, The Sun reported, with ‘a government source’ saying: ‘The latest Sage numbers are utterly bleak.’

SAGE has piled fresh pressure on Boris Johnson to impose tougher restrictions as it warned up to 85,000 people could die in a second wave. A ‘reasonable worst case scenario’ put forward by SAGE suggested daily deaths could remain above 500 for three months or more until March next year.

London ‘will go into Tier 3 lockdown in two weeks’ as Britain faces a super-spreader Christmas

London could be plunged into Tier 3 lockdown within two weeks as England creeped closer towards full national lockdown by the back door last night, with millions told they will face extra curbs.    

Boris Johnson is facing renewed pressure from his medical officers to impose a nation-wide shutdown before and after Christmas in a bid to allow families to gather over the holidays, and sources close so Sadiq Khan expect the capital to be locked down imminently.

Senior figures are warning that the UK’s three-tier system is not enough to ‘get on top of the numbers’, with deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam reportedly beginning to change his mind over whether regional lockdowns will suppress the virus . He backed the move at a No 10 press conference last week

Presenting what one source called ‘very, very bleak’ data to a meeting of Covid-O, the the Cabinet subcommittee on coronavirus, he said that daily hospital admissions had reached the highest level since April at 1,404.  

There are fears that the whole country will be at Tier 3 by Christmas, and unable to meet extended family members unless the Government takes harsh, draconian action before the season.

Allowing people to visit family at Christmas will be a ‘spreader event’ that could cause a spike in infections many times worse than that caused by the return of university students, experts believe. 

But introducing national restrictions before and after Christmas, while lifting them for the big day could help minimise the impact. 

One senior health official told the Telegraph that anti-Covid measures were most likely to be successful if they were taken on a national basis rather than toughening up the rules for Tier 3. 

They added that a post-Christmas ‘circuit-breaker’ lockdown could also help reverse numbers and curb rising numbers of hospitalisations as fears spread that Britain’s ICUs could be overrun.

‘Releasing measures for two days is unlikely to cause a big upswing,’ a source said.’ But it won’t do nothing. Christmas brings people from all over the country to sit inside together, so its quite likely to be a spreading event.

‘But people want to see their loved ones and they want to make physical contact, and we have to recognise that.’ 

Advertisement

Independent experts told MailOnline it’s likely most of the places in England that are in Tier One will move into Tier Two by Christmas because the Rule of Six and 10pm curfew are not enough to stamp out rising infections. 

Martin McKee, a professor of European public health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and member of Independent Sage, said: ‘We unfortunately have allowed the infection to get out of control and as a consequence we are going to need to turn this around, otherwise it will just keep going up, more will get seriously ill and more people will die.

‘The sooner we impose tighter restrictions, the better. I see MPs saying “the rates are low in my area so we shouldn’t do anything”. It’s not about if case are low, it’s about if they are increasing rapidly. 

‘We saw very clearly in March that it’s better sooner than later. So we really should be doing this now, we really have no time to lose.’

But Professor McKee stressed that with tighter restrictions, three essential things are needed — a clampdown on indoor social mixing where the virus can spread easily, mental health support, and a working test and trace system. Currently the UK’s NHS Test and Trace is not performing to the ‘world beating’ status that was promised.

Professor McKee added: ‘As long as infections are going up, we have a major problem. Simply because of the nature of exponential growth. It’s a simple nature of mathematics. Even if the infections are going up even slightly, the rate of growth will go upwards faster. 

‘On the other hand, if we can put in really stringent measure to stop people mixing with each other, you can get a large drop in quite a short period of time.

Professor Paul Hunter, an infectious disease expert at the University of East Anglia, said: ‘The Tier One restrictions are clearly not working in terms of suppressing the epidemic. I suspect the government would decide to increase, in most areas of the country, will at least move into Tier Two in the next month. And some of the current Tier Two will move into Tier Three. 

‘The interesting thing is it’s not going up quite as quickly in the northern cities as it was. And in some of those cities, such as Liverpool, it does seem to be declining a bit already.

‘I think it’s a little too early to say whether these Tier Two/Tier Three levels are not working. The bottom line is the higher restrictions may be working but it’s too early to be sure.

‘In the southern small town rural areas, that’s where a lot of the current increases are at the moment. It’s very obvious cases are increasing in the south now. Pretty much everywhere in between is on the up.

‘The issue is what time will they decide that is no longer acceptable or tolerable and then increase restrictions in those areas.’

Simon Clarke, an associate professor in cellular microbiology at University of Reading, said: ‘Are local restriction enough? They should be, but the problem is not so much going from Tier Two to Three, but going from One to Two. We know in certain parts of the country that is not happening quickly enough.

‘My gut feeling is we are heading for tightening restrictions between now and into the new year. I think that it will be something like Tier Three or perhaps tighter. I think we will get a tier 4 added on top. But it’s just a guess.’ 

Britain is slowly creeping one step closer to a de facto lockdown every day, with the UK confirming another 23,065 positive test results and 280 deaths yesterday.

Cases are up 8.6 per cent on the 21,242 announced last Thursday, while deaths have increased by 48 per cent in the same time. 

35007482 8893769 image a 6 1604074593156

35007224 8892463 image a 16 1603988699093

Boris Johnson is facing renewed pressure from his medical officers to impose a nation-wide shutdown before and after Christmas in a bid to allow families to gather over the holidays

Boris Johnson is facing renewed pressure from his medical officers to impose a nation-wide shutdown before and after Christmas in a bid to allow families to gather over the holidays

Boris Johnson is facing renewed pressure from his medical officers to impose a nation-wide shutdown before and after Christmas in a bid to allow families to gather over the holidays, and sources close so Sadiq Khan expect the capital to be locked down imminently.

Senior figures are warning that the UK’s three-tier system is not enough to ‘get on top of the numbers’, with deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam reportedly beginning to change his mind over whether regional lockdowns will suppress the virus . He backed the move at a No 10 press conference last week

Presenting what one source called ‘very, very bleak’ data to a meeting of Covid-O, the the Cabinet subcommittee on coronavirus, he said that daily hospital admissions had reached the highest level since April at 1,404. 

Allowing people to visit family at Christmas will be a spreader event that could cause a spike in infections many times worse than that caused by the return of university students, experts believe.

But introducing national restrictions before and after Christmas, while lifting them for the big day could help minimise the impact. 

Almost 60 per cent of the population – around 32.6 million – will be under stricter rules by Monday, and it is understood London could be moved into the top tier in two weeks unless infection rates drop significantly.

Sixteen areas will move into the ‘high risk’ Tier Two at midnight including Oxford, Luton, East Riding of Yorkshire, Kingston Upon Hull, Derbyshire Dales, Derby and Staffordshire.

That means that more than 21.6 million face the restrictions that include a ban on socialising indoors with anyone from another household, whether at home or in bars, restaurants and cafes. 

A further 11 million will be in the ‘very high risk’ Tier Three from midnight on Sunday when Leeds and the rest of West Yorkshire are added to the places where pubs are closed unless serving food.

This will leave only 23.7million without enhanced restrictions.

With tougher restrictions in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, it means just over three-fifths of the UK population are living under extra lockdown restrictions.

HOW HAVE INFECTION RATES CHANGED IN YOUR AREA? 
Local authority name Sept 21 to 27 Sept 28 to Oct 4 Change Oct 5 to 11 Change Oct 12 to 18 Change Oct 19 to 25 Change
Barking and Dagenham 62 63.41 39.18% 98.17 54.82% 119.3 21.52% 131.51 10.23%
Barnet 43.2 86.39 267.77% 110.64 28.07% 114.68 3.65% 140.7 22.69%
Barnsley 76.56 148.66 336.85% 279.91 88.29% 457.33 63.38% 499.06 9.12%
Bath and North East Somerset 37.25 67.78 367.77% 120.03 77.09% 112.79 -6.03% 191.43 69.72%
Bedford 47.9 74.44 138.90% 81.37 9.31% 87.14 7.09% 88.29 1.32%
Bexley 28.19 56.39 141.40% 66.05 17.13% 82.97 25.62% 113.58 36.89%
Birmingham 147.92 159.31 28.64% 190.92 19.84% 227.36 19.09% 257.75 13.37%
Blackburn with Darwen 182.37 257.86 30.41% 446.24 73.06% 576.5 29.19% 774.24 34.30%
Blackpool 91.79 197.21 169.60% 288.28 46.18% 424.54 47.27% 425.97 0.34%
Bolton 244.13 265 9.80% 335.25 26.51% 442.01 31.84% 546.34 23.60%
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 25.55 74.12 252.95% 134.57 81.56% 144.44 7.33% 184.91 28.02%
Bracknell Forest 25.3 40.8 212.40% 53.04 30.00% 81.6 53.85% 84.86 4.00%
Bradford 184.34 293.27 98.37% 335.14 14.28% 395.72 18.08% 481.13 21.58%
Brent 50.64 79.45 181.74% 99.16 24.81% 98.55 -0.62% 113.41 15.08%
Brighton and Hove 21.66 62.22 448.68% 82.51 32.61% 93.51 13.33% 142.67 52.57%
Bristol, City of 28.27 66.47 275.54% 156.46 135.38% 245.37 56.83% 333.64 35.97%
Bromley 27.68 55.67 242.58% 70.11 25.94% 89.97 28.33% 108.93 21.07%
Buckinghamshire 24.82 48.35 182.75% 88.98 84.03% 86.77 -2.48% 104.6 20.55%
Bury 216.24 290.59 52.89% 389.55 34.05% 430.39 10.48% 526.21 22.26%
Calderdale 97.42 173.56 135.27% 242.6 39.78% 311.65 28.46% 410.49 31.72%
Cambridgeshire 18.06 45.29 355.18% 65.34 44.27% 67.48 3.28% 82.17 21.77%
Camden 27.4 55.55 138.11% 111.84 101.33% 121.84 8.94% 109.62 -10.03%
Central Bedfordshire 23.56 37.76 67.67% 51.27 35.78% 61.67 20.28% 71.37 15.73%
Cheshire East 61.17 141.35 287.90% 168.68 19.33% 173.11 2.63% 215.8 24.66%
Cheshire West and Chester 78.12 143.7 220.12% 191.21 33.06% 199.08 4.12% 214.53 7.76%
Cornwall and Isles of Scilly 40.4 26.58 32.17% 32 20.39% 30.78 -3.81% 44.95 46.04%
County Durham 110.55 201.29 209.30% 338.05 67.94% 329.56 -2.51% 278.44 -15.51%
Coventry 74.56 108.2 95.13% 166.34 53.73% 184.11 10.68% 199.99 8.63%
Croydon 32.58 66.46 307.98% 75.25 13.23% 79.39 5.50% 105.76 33.22%
Cumbria 51.2 86.6 252.03% 121.6 40.42% 152.4 25.33% 170.2 11.68%
Darlington 103.93 176.03 358.53% 206.92 17.55% 286.51 38.46% 296.81 3.59%
Derby 43.14 82.78 124.21% 134.08 61.97% 171.39 27.83% 328.8 91.84%
Derbyshire 44.35 93.44 201.23% 144.51 54.66% 186.5 29.06% 294.63 57.98%
Devon 18.82 84.37 957.27% 105.69 25.27% 78.52 -25.71% 69.79 -11.12%
Doncaster 62.84 147.81 177.73% 220.27 49.02% 350.76 59.24% 513.64 46.44%
Dorset 11.36 25.1 352.25% 60.76 142.07% 72.39 19.14% 103.3 42.70%
Dudley 56.28 79.29 90.28% 102.3 29.02% 150.81 47.42% 224.82 49.07%
Ealing 55.29 98.01 248.91% 139.85 42.69% 162.08 15.90% 212.4 31.05%
East Riding of Yorkshire 49.83 109.33 372.06% 133.36 21.98% 172.35 29.24% 257.35 49.32%
East Sussex 14.72 30.51 359.49% 44.86 47.03% 50.43 12.42% 58.32 15.65%
Enfield 42.54 72.8 158.52% 93.77 28.80% 137.21 46.33% 138.41 0.87%
Essex 26.66 48.35 176.92% 69.97 44.72% 90.25 28.98% 99.05 9.75%
Gateshead 162.33 241.02 83.08% 255.38 5.96% 259.34 1.55% 355.84 37.21%
Gloucestershire 19.62 40.5 200.00% 62 53.09% 62.63 1.02% 68.6 9.53%
Greenwich 36.47 50.7 217.27% 75.36 48.64% 85.43 13.36% 92.73 8.55%
Hackney and City of London 55.36 101.77 311.03% 132.37 30.07% 164.35 24.16% 156.79 -4.60%
Halton 265.82 343.1 80.49% 387.91 13.06% 340 -12.35% 312.96 -7.95%
Hammersmith and Fulham 45.91 75.08 238.96% 115.59 53.96% 163.12 41.12% 190.12 16.55%
Hampshire 16.78 35.08 219.20% 55.48 58.15% 68.35 23.20% 94.32 38.00%
Haringey 40.95 89.34 192.73% 116.88 30.83% 126.93 8.60% 142.57 12.32%
Harrow 42.2 95.95 244.28% 116.26 21.17% 127.81 9.93% 133.78 4.67%
Hartlepool 153.74 250.9 213.35% 274.39 9.36% 348.06 26.85% 335.24 -3.68%
Havering 58.18 60.49 80.46% 100.56 66.24% 126.76 26.05% 148.72 17.32%
Herefordshire, County of 12.97 22.3 152.83% 37.86 69.78% 54.46 43.85% 86.1 58.10%
Hertfordshire 30.94 66.83 166.79% 87.35 30.70% 90.79 3.94% 106.68 17.50%
Hillingdon 57.35 75.28 117.95% 102.32 35.92% 135.24 32.17% 160 18.31%
Hounslow 57.82 81.39 166.24% 105.7 29.87% 139.21 31.70% 177.15 27.25%
Isle of Wight 11.29 12.7 259.77% 17.63 38.82% 24.69 40.05% 31.04 25.72%
Islington 42.89 76.3 198.40% 90.32 18.37% 121.25 34.24% 126.62 4.43%
Kensington and Chelsea 24.34 81.34 262.80% 94.15 15.75% 135.14 43.54% 138.99 2.85%
Kent 16.44 34.46 240.51% 50.46 46.43% 54.25 7.51% 75.24 38.69%
Kingston upon Hull, City of 35.41 95.85 555.16% 107.01 11.64% 144.74 35.26% 279.08 92.81%
Kingston upon Thames 33.24 72.11 255.57% 101.97 41.41% 144.78 41.98% 184.22 27.24%
Kirklees 118.92 192.37 106.85% 254.44 32.27% 300.37 18.05% 388.82 29.45%
Knowsley 335.41 602.54 182.30% 700.64 16.28% 663.52 -5.30% 542.88 -18.18%
Lambeth 41.71 77.6 272.00% 92.94 19.77% 122.38 31.68% 137.1 12.03%
Lancashire 160.6 246.02 139.88% 347.6 41.29% 387.44 11.46% 426.22 10.01%
Leeds 170.46 379.13 239.39% 394.63 4.09% 393.5 -0.29% 388.71 -1.22%
Leicester 111.51 140.31 23.94% 184.06 31.18% 222.46 20.86% 326.06 46.57%
Leicestershire 51.12 92.19 124.47% 161.58 75.27% 176.87 9.46% 272.89 54.29%
Lewisham 34 64.09 206.21% 77.16 20.39% 79.13 2.55% 90.57 14.46%
Lincolnshire 27.85 63.19 238.82% 92.61 46.56% 103.65 11.92% 160.93 55.26%
Liverpool 342.94 580.27 186.43% 681.47 17.44% 584.69 -14.20% 462.01 -20.98%
Luton 61.96 72.28 41.28% 89.65 24.03% 141.28 57.59% 150.2 6.31%
Manchester 307.67 558.19 215.22% 474.62 -14.97% 438.99 -7.51% 486.2 10.75%
Medway 17.59 30.87 177.36% 38.77 25.59% 45.59 17.59% 80.77 77.17%
Merton 26.63 47.93 266.72% 77.95 62.63% 95.38 22.36% 134.11 40.61%
Middlesbrough 136.19 259.61 375.30% 280.89 8.20% 351.82 25.25% 353.95 0.61%
Milton Keynes 24.86 45.28 139.20% 65.69 45.08% 63.46 -3.39% 95.75 50.88%
Newcastle upon Tyne 299.19 492.37 204.91% 466.94 -5.16% 313.39 -32.88% 312.07 -0.42%
Newham 66.26 75.04 100.75% 103.36 37.74% 129.41 25.20% 142.16 9.85%
Norfolk 17.3 38.01 228.52% 50.89 33.89% 63.89 25.55% 84.71 32.59%
North East Lincolnshire 35.1 76.46 481.00% 162.32 112.29% 237.52 46.33% 339.68 43.01%
North Lincolnshire 47.59 94.03 224.02% 151.49 61.11% 170.06 12.26% 191.54 12.63%
North Somerset 27.9 39.99 56.33% 54.87 37.21% 71.15 29.67% 130.2 82.99%
North Tyneside 156.32 232.31 137.93% 251.55 8.28% 210.67 -16.25% 279.44 32.64%
North Yorkshire 67.47 113.1 188.82% 134.29 18.74% 141.09 5.06% 164.39 16.51%
Northamptonshire 24.43 60.14 198.02% 96.25 60.04% 107.53 11.72% 127.31 18.39%
Northumberland 171.2 180.19 114.38% 175.54 -2.58% 176.47 0.53% 179.88 1.93%
Nottingham 94.32 609.79 1523.94% 927.91 52.17% 610.69 -34.19% 427.46 -30.00%
Nottinghamshire 49.74 137.04 387.17% 220.47 60.88% 272.27 23.50% 325.03 19.38%
Oldham 193.58 295.64 62.27% 382.52 29.39% 468.56 22.49% 661.72 41.22%
Oxfordshire 25.59 64.48 309.14% 86.31 33.86% 89.35 3.52% 111.9 25.24%
Peterborough 35.1 62.3 223.13% 81.58 30.95% 95.92 17.58% 125.09 30.41%
Plymouth 23.27 37.77 80.03% 68.68 81.84% 103.01 49.99% 141.55 37.41%
Portsmouth 32.11 50.72 194.54% 104.7 106.43% 144.25 37.77% 163.79 13.55%
Reading 29.67 43.89 343.78% 74.79 70.40% 95.81 28.11% 109.41 14.19%
Redbridge 73.06 110.74 78.84% 125.15 13.01% 136.95 9.43% 168.4 22.96%
Redcar and Cleveland 70.73 173.53 395.80% 210.72 21.43% 280.71 33.21% 323 15.07%
Richmond upon Thames 39.39 108.58 593.36% 144.94 33.49% 153.02 5.57% 146.96 -3.96%
Rochdale 202.78 335.41 126.06% 429.83 28.15% 508.97 18.41% 574.16 12.81%
Rotherham 100.98 203.08 228.66% 279.57 37.66% 386.19 38.14% 493.2 27.71%
Rutland 42.58 85.16 580.19% 132.74 55.87% 107.7 -18.86% 95.17 -11.63%
Salford 195.49 317.19 114.36% 390.21 23.02% 495.3 26.93% 588.79 18.88%
Sandwell 113.26 114.78 19.67% 146.45 27.59% 216.17 47.61% 275.23 27.32%
Sefton 226.84 371.19 194.83% 477.19 28.56% 438.48 -8.11% 383.49 -12.54%
Sheffield 121.74 385.74 519.76% 455.16 18.00% 431.05 -5.30% 420.45 -2.46%
Shropshire 42.4 59.11 193.79% 86.34 46.07% 84.48 -2.15% 119.45 41.39%
Slough 82.92 86.93 217.03% 92.28 6.15% 155.14 68.12% 150.46 -3.02%
Solihull 90.12 119.7 61.87% 174.7 45.95% 209.36 19.84% 223.69 6.84%
Somerset 13.87 32.9 362.73% 39.13 18.94% 45.89 17.28% 61.36 33.71%
South Gloucestershire 24.2 58.58 255.25% 88.04 50.29% 118.56 34.67% 192.22 62.13%
South Tyneside 221.89 274.88 37.42% 245.07 -10.84% 235.14 -4.05% 222.55 -5.35%
Southampton 19.01 42.77 199.93% 60.19 40.73% 74.05 23.03% 114.05 54.02%
Southend-on-Sea 31.13 42.59 143.79% 48.05 12.82% 68.81 43.20% 82.46 19.84%
Southwark 47.99 60.53 114.42% 79.35 31.09% 95.66 20.55% 121.69 27.21%
St. Helens 254.17 347.76 167.24% 443.56 27.55% 437.47 -1.37% 420.85 -3.80%
Staffordshire 38.66 82.2 173.82% 121.2 47.45% 169.06 39.49% 262.4 55.21%
Stockport 110.42 227.32 162.62% 297.18 30.73% 299.91 0.92% 396.02 32.05%
Stockton-on-Tees 100.84 233.6 339.02% 342.54 46.64% 357.24 4.29% 447.43 25.25%
Stoke-on-Trent 49.54 60.46 54.99% 118.19 95.48% 192.3 62.70% 301.51 56.79%
Suffolk 8.41 33.49 298.22% 46.37 38.46% 55.03 18.68% 72.63 31.98%
Sunderland 215.7 296.72 108.61% 299.24 0.85% 321.92 7.58% 323.72 0.56%
Surrey 27.08 66.29 350.65% 83.01 25.22% 94.8 14.20% 106.58 12.43%
Sutton 23.75 36.83 162.14% 81.9 122.37% 90.14 10.06% 114.85 27.41%
Swindon 19.35 27.9 181.82% 45.46 62.94% 69.31 52.46% 103.96 49.99%
Tameside 174.4 245.48 74.84% 322.75 31.48% 371.31 15.05% 513.92 38.41%
Telford and Wrekin 43.92 56.16 173.02% 81.73 45.53% 154.01 88.44% 211.28 37.19%
Thurrock 24.09 43.02 226.16% 75.14 74.66% 122.17 62.59% 157.74 29.12%
Torbay 14.68 49.9 466.40% 82.19 64.71% 100.54 22.33% 126.23 25.55%
Tower Hamlets 62.51 85.61 164.80% 97.92 14.38% 133.64 36.48% 148.73 11.29%
Trafford 139.88 279.75 277.28% 336.63 20.33% 327.36 -2.75% 429.74 31.27%
Wakefield 86.13 163.93 243.96% 238.87 45.71% 310.64 30.05% 401.08 29.11%
Walsall 83.37 122.25 81.76% 168.84 38.11% 211.57 25.31% 305.8 44.54%
Waltham Forest 47.3 79.43 147.21% 94.95 19.54% 102.53 7.98% 135.75 32.40%
Wandsworth 37.92 71.89 243.48% 101.31 40.92% 114.35 12.87% 143.78 25.74%
Warrington 197.61 268.55 102.15% 337.6 25.71% 348.55 3.24% 406.64 16.67%
Warwickshire 40.49 70.94 98.05% 101.05 42.44% 126.14 24.83% 166.63 32.10%
West Berkshire 22.72 39.13 181.92% 49.23 25.81% 57.43 16.66% 83.94 46.16%
West Sussex 21.64 33.1 148.69% 43.06 30.09% 50.35 16.93% 73.96 46.89%
Westminster 29.08 71.18 220.63% 88.02 23.66% 108.3 23.04% 135.08 24.73%
Wigan 160.04 274.45 124.39% 407.71 48.56% 460.66 12.99% 655.99 42.40%
Wiltshire 15.2 32.8 221.57% 53.8 64.02% 68 26.39% 84.2 23.82%
Windsor and Maidenhead 31.7 80.57 335.75% 113.59 40.98% 141.33 24.42% 112.93 -20.09%
Wirral 193.82 252.77 61.86% 315.42 24.79% 267.27 -15.27% 282.71 5.78%
Wokingham 28.64 45 327.76% 61.36 36.36% 76.55 24.76% 95.26 24.44%
Wolverhampton 83.16 75.94 21.21% 133.66 76.01% 191 42.90% 246.43 29.02%
Worcestershire 43.47 70.83 232.22% 93.15 31.51% 105.24 12.98% 128.4 22.01%
York 72.64 195.14 341.89% 266.36 36.50% 307.19 15.33% 244.99 -20.25%

This post first appeared on dailymail.co.uk

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 DiazHub.