Do you think it shouldn’t have been reported in the news? 

Thanks for the link. The Guardian article i have mentioned in my post has Lancaster second and that has 522 per 100,000.

Perfect pic.twitter.com/dIwC4yemiV

— Janey Godley (@JaneyGodley) May 12, 2020

I was simply sticking up for a post that had received some unfair replies.

However to answer your question...

That an employee who was in the 'high risk' category with a known underlying illness, was still working as a tickets office person for a train company?

That she was assaulted whilst at work?

Or that a possibility that she may have been deliberately infected? 

Yes to all of the above to being reported.

But reporting or implying as if it was a certainty that she was definitely infected by the attacker, and died as a result, then no.

I’ve just read the BBC News article in full . https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52616071

For what it’s worth I think it is a fair description of what happened to this poor woman, and the story is told in a balanced and non sensationalist way. 

Whether we like it or not, the fact she was spat at by someone who said they had coronavirus , and then very sadly died of the disease, IS news. It would be wrong to say she was definitely infected by this individual, and nowhere in that BBC article does it do so. 

I think it’s sad that we’re discussing anything other than the plight of this poor woman and her family, and that the focus has now moved away from this. If you want my opinion, I think that is why so many people took issue with four’s post. 

I read somewhere that Barrow has lots of workers who commute in and live in digs for the week and that had contributed to the high infection rate. Can't remember where I read it though.

Update, following today's official @ONS data of total deaths, a cautious estimate of the number of UK excess deaths up to 12 May is

59,700

Of these 51,000 have happened and 8,700 are estimates bringing the official data up to date using evidence from hospitals

1/ pic.twitter.com/64tqcIAPlY

— Chris Giles (@ChrisGiles_) May 12, 2020

60,000 dead. A tragedy and a disaster. 

I know I've read the BBC myself. I tend only these days to read BBC as they on balance less prone to sensationalism as such.

But other stations are not.. one reporter saying she died after she was spat on. Not sure if it was itv or sky, but it was on the television in the house. 

But the original paper to which he responded to had this..

"UK rail worker dies of coronavirus after being spat at while on duty"

As the headline this certainly does imply the spitting was the cause. But it was a sensationalist headline to draw attention to an article which was largely to do with her working in first place despite being high risk, and lack off ppe and so forth. Definitely more about  having a dig at the company rather then the assault.

You can't visit family but you'll soon be able to welcome strangers to your house if it's on the market!

Property market set to reopen as lockdown rules eased for home buyers and sellers

"The housing market has been given the green light to reopen after the Government announced it would lift the ban on property viewings and valuations taking place"

All those screaming for Britain to ease its lockdown for economic reasons need to take a long hard look at our real #coronavirus 'excess death' toll of over 60,000 people.
This is an unfurling catastrophe & we're no nearer beating the virus now than we were two months ago.

— *****Morgan (@piersmorgan) May 12, 2020

Funny how we both found out about that data from independent sources and posted about it within 3 minutes of each other!

I was going by the colours on the map and didn't spot Lancaster, but yes you are right.

At the other end of the table, Hastings is the lowest in England at 47.4 per 100,000, followed by Mendip in Somerset at 49.6. It's interesting that Hastings is very near Ashford, Kent which is one of the worst areas, and quite deprived; much like Barrow at the other end of the table.

The lockdown needs to continue until new deaths and infections are under control, and it shouldn’t be eased before clear information is provided in terms of contact tracing. We need evidence that the resources are indeed there. We also need an app that works. No excuses. I’m convinced, with all the technological brains in the world, that it really shouldn’t be this difficult. 

However we can’t ignore the fact that a lockdown which continues until we are all 100% safe, via a vaccine or very effective treatment, would bring catastrophic consequences in itself.

We need to look at this holistically.

Edit - I know you know all this :D 

Some of the easing is clearly for economical reasons and just doesn't stand up to logic. Aparently now you can go into someone's home to do a viewing yet you can't go into the same house to visit your parents. Yes i know you are not going to kiss and hug a stranger but are people really going to do that anyway at this stage of events?

Ten years ago the Tories brought in austerity because they felt it the only way to repair the National debt. After this year the National debt is going to be far higher than that when they took over yet this time we can just print money. There are no plans to bring back austerity measures apparently. What has changed so much ?

Telegraph reporting they are going to bring back Austerity