Five years after we were 'punished', Greater Manchester is being asked 'what happened to you during Covid?'
Then, millions were united in grief, suffering through the deaths of their loved ones, or themselves battling a disease that would cast a long shadow on their health all these years later.
By autumn of 2020, Greater Manchester was united in fury as the region was not only thrust into the toughest restrictions in the country, but penalised for having a voice following a stand-off with the government.
READ MORE: Waiting in the toilets at Manchester Airport, a gang of Americans thought they were about to make a lot of money
READ MORE: Man tragically found dead in river almost two months after major search commenced is named
The UK Covid-19 Inquiry has heard from around 54,000 people across the UK, exploring the deep human impact of the pandemic. From tomorrow (Thursday), the inquiry will be in the city for two days, giving the people of Manchester their turn to finally share their stories.
'We really want to hear from as many people as possible about their pandemic story,' Kate Eisenstein, the inquiry's deputy secretary, told the Manchester Evening News. 'We know that different people in communities across the UK and in different parts of the Greater Manchester and the north west, experienced the pandemic in different ways – whether they were a frontline health or social care worker, whether they were homeschooling their kids, whether they were shielding and feeling isolated from friends and family.
'The Covid inquiry has two goals. The first is, establish the facts of what happened during the pandemic. The second is to make findings and recommendations that will help the UK be better prepared for the next pandemic because, unfortunately, it is likely there will be another pandemic we just don't know when.'
Greater Manchester has been disproportionately affected by Covid-19. The north west, particularly parts of Greater Manchester, was already suffering some of the worst health in the whole country because of higher deprivation, higher pollution, poorer housing, and fewer job opportunities.
The pandemic only served to sharpen those inequalities with the rest of the UK, with scores going to hospital with severe coronavirus, some of the highest infection rates in the country, and major pressures on the NHS in the years after.
'There has been a real range of perspectives shared,' said Ms Eisenstein. 'Most of them are quite personal experiences. We frequently hear about some very positive things like I learned a new hobby, I had more time with my family, there were some stresses which slipped away. But we also hear about really challenging personal or community circumstances, mental health worries, fear about job security, feeling socially isolated.
'Here in Manchester, it'll be interesting to hear if people living in the more rural areas of Saddleworth had a different experience to people working in the city center or frontline workers, working in some of the south Manchester hospitals.'
'One of the things that I'm looking forward to hearing here in Manchester and Greater Manchester might be about people who were students in one of the Manchester or Salford universities at the time, who might have felt they missed out on a typical university experience,' continued Ms Eisenstein. 'Contrasting with perhaps older people who might have been living on their own and feeling isolated from friends and family who might normally provide them with support.
'All the way through to people running care homes, who were constantly in contact with other people, but worried about their own safety and the safety of the residents that they were supporting, and having to make judgments every day about how they do that during a changing and scary situation.'
There were also the political revelations that set the region apart. Bombshell moments at Covid Inquiry hearings in 2023 exposed how government committee was told that Greater Manchester deserved a 'punishment beating' with tougher Covid restrictions because of Andy Burnham's 'appalling behaviour' during the Tier 3 stand-off in autumn 2020
The Greater Manchester mayor told the inquiry how ministers made an example of the region for taking a stand as Tier 3 restrictions were forced upon it – despite local leaders arguing there was not enough financial support available. He told the inquiry of suggestions Lancashire should have a lighter set of measures than Greater Manchester because they 'showed a willingness to cooperate'.
The stand-off between Mr Burnham and the government over how much money Greater Manchester would get to support workers affected by the tougher Tier 3 restrictions came to a head on October 20, 2020. The mayor found out during a press conference outside Bridgewater Hall that a decision had been made by the government despite failing to reach an agreement with local leaders.
Mr Burnham told the inquiry: "It just felt that we were treated in a way that other parts of the country were treated. There is no way that a borough in Greater London would have been treated in the way Bolton was."
There are some people who never want to revisit the pandemic. But those leading the inquiry say it can be 'cathartic'.
Ms Eisenstein said: 'Here in Manchester, there were particular local and regional circumstances like the Tier 3 restrictions; a big younger population due to the universities; people are very connected across the 10 boroughs of the city-region; such a mixed economy of people in roles who would normally be office based, but also people who are having to continue their front line roles in health care or transport or in manufacturing.
'It will be really interesting to see if those local considerations and how people felt about how they and their community across Greater Manchester were treated, and whether they did feel there were particular local circumstances or local experiences that they think the inquiry should know about.'
Every Story Matters event is a 'safe, confidential space' where, if people become distressed, there are 'trained people on site to support'.
The inquiry will be visiting on Thursday 6 and Friday 7 February and will be at Manchester Town Hall Extension, next to Central Library, on both days from 10.30am until 5.30pm. Members of the public will be able to speak to inquiry staff to find out more about Every Story Matters and share their experience of the pandemic in person, online or using a paper form. Counsellors will also be present to provide emotional support for those who may need it.
'For those who do come down to see us in person, you can either sit with us and fill in a form on your own or with some assistance,' explains Ms Eisenstein. 'Or if you'd rather sit and actually talk to someone who will help record your story in writing, then we can do that.
'We do recognise that sometimes it can be upsetting or distressing to remember what happens during the pandemic, and that's completely normal. We're looking for a whole range of stories, big or small. Something that might seem like a small experience to you is really important for the inquiry to hear.
'It could be something like a parent remembering a particular toy that their child sought comfort in, to somebody talking to us about their worries that they'd lose their business, to somebody who experienced a really difficult bereavement, to somebody recalling how actually they took up knitting or crochet because they had a bit more time whilst they were furloughed from work.
'There is no right or wrong story for people to share. This is about us understanding as many stories as we can possibly hear.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
28 minutes ago
- Forbes
ACA Premiums Are Set To Spike For Some In 2026—How To Lock In Savings Now
Editorial Note: We earn a commission from partner links on Forbes Advisor. Commissions do not affect our editors' opinions or evaluations. Millions of Americans could lose a tax credit that saves them thousands of dollars on ACA Marketplace health insurance by the end of the year. The tax credit, initially expanded under the American Rescue Plan during the pandemic and later extended through 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act, saw expanded eligibility beyond the income cap of 400% of the federal poverty level starting in 2021. These subsidies capped out-of-pocket premiums to no more than 8.5% of income for those who qualified. Unless Congress acts, the expanded eligibility will expire at the end of the year, creating what experts are calling a 'subsidy cliff' for enrollees with incomes above the 400% income threshold. The 2024 Open Enrollment report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found enrollees at 400% of the federal poverty level saved an annual average of $4,248 on their health premiums. Losing eligibility for this tax credit could leave many Americans facing unaffordable health insurance costs. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reports the subsidy expansion of the tax credit led to increased enrollment in the ACA Marketplace, particularly in low-income communities and states that hadn't previously embraced the program. According to Kaiser Family Foundation, since 2020, enrollment in the ACA Marketplace has more than doubled, with 88% of the total growth—11.4 million out of 12.9 million new enrollees—in enrollment came from states won by Trump in 2024. States like Texas, Mississippi, West Virginia and Georgia saw their enrollment numbers more than triple. A household of two earning up to $84,600 (400% of the poverty level) currently qualifies for the tax credit. But if their income increases in 2026, they'll lose their eligibility that saves them $500 on monthly health insurance premiums—or $6,000 annually. 'It's one of the more lucrative credits that are out there for individual taxpayers,' says Tommy Lucas, a certified financial planner at Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo. Talks to extend the enhanced tax credit have stalled in Congress, with House Republicans 'balking' at the thought, according to a Politico report . That means households already teetering past 400% of the federal poverty line—or those that know they'll exceed it next year—need to start making a financial plan now to stay within the income threshold limits. The battle, financial experts say, begins at the tax office. A few potential tax planning steps to take include: Tax loss harvesting : This investment method means investors sell investments that have lost value to help cancel out the taxes on their gains. Look at your portfolio to identify investments that are down and see if selling them could lower your tax bill. This investment method means investors sell investments that have lost value to help cancel out the taxes on their gains. Look at your portfolio to identify investments that are down and see if selling them could lower your tax bill. Leverage health savings accounts : You can claim tax deductions through contributions made to a health-savings account (HSA). With the new tax law that passed under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, all Bronze and catastrophic plans under the ACA are considered HSA-eligible, starting in 2026. 'For single-filers, you can contribute $4,300, for families, the maximum is $8,550. There's a $1,000 catch-up contribution for those 55 and older, so you can effectively reduce and back away from the cliff by that amount,' says Lucas. You can claim tax deductions through contributions made to a health-savings account (HSA). With the new tax law that passed under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, all Bronze and catastrophic plans under the ACA are considered HSA-eligible, starting in 2026. 'For single-filers, you can contribute $4,300, for families, the maximum is $8,550. There's a $1,000 catch-up contribution for those 55 and older, so you can effectively reduce and back away from the cliff by that amount,' says Lucas. Max out retirement contributions in tax-deductible accounts: One of the most effective ways to lower your taxable income is to contribute to a 401(k) or IRA, which offer upfront tax breaks. In 2025, individuals can contribute up to $23,500 to a 401(k) (plus an extra $7,500 if you're 50 or older), and up to $7,000 to a traditional IRA ($8,000 with the catch-up). 'This deferral of earnings will lower your taxable income exposure,' said Bill Shafransky, a senior wealth advisor at Moneco Advisors and a member of the Financial Planning Association. Lucas recommended turning to tax experts and services that can help enrollees navigate the 'complicated' process to keep their income within means. While individuals can and should file using free or low-cost tax software , a little expertise could go a long way. 'This is going to potentially be thousands of dollars in cost, so always talk to a professional who knows the ins and outs of this,' says Lucas. 'Open enrollment is coming up pretty soon in November, so start planning now.'


Business Wire
an hour ago
- Business Wire
AM Best Removes From Under Review With Developing Implications and Affirms Credit Ratings
BUSINESS WIRE)-- AM Best has removed from under review with developing implications and affirmed the Financial Strength Rating of C (Weak) and the Long-Term Issuer Credit Rating of 'ccc' (Weak) of Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York, EmblemHealth Insurance Company and EmblemHealth Plan, Inc., collectively referred to as Emblem. All companies are subsidiaries of EmblemHealth, Inc. and are domiciled in New York (NY). The outlook assigned to these Credit Ratings (ratings) is stable. The ratings reflect Emblem's balance sheet strength, which AM Best assesses as very weak, as well as its marginal operating performance, neutral business profile and marginal enterprise risk management (ERM). AM Best assesses Emblem's balance sheet strength as very weak, with risk-adjusted capitalization, as measured by Best's Capital Adequacy Ratio (BCAR), also assessed as very weak. Absolute capital and surplus improved slightly in 2024, driven by unrealized capital gains that offset net losses. In the first quarter of 2025, Emblem reported further improvement in its capital and surplus as well as gains from the sale of ConnectiCare operations in the first quarter of 2025, which resulted in more than a $60 million improvement in the capital and surplus at Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York, the lead entity. Emblem's investment portfolio is conservative, with cash and short-term comprising over half of the investment portfolio at year-end 2024. Although capital and surplus improved in 2024 and through first-quarter 2025, Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York, the lead operating entity, remains under a capital restoration plan with the New York State Department of Financial Services. The company is forecasting to restore capital by the end of 2025 and conclude the capital restoration plan. Emblem has a long-term trend of net losses and underwriting losses. However, AM Best acknowledges that results improved through year-end 2024, which continued into the first quarter of 2025. In the first quarter of 2025, Emblem reported a significant reduction in underwriting losses year over year and reported a slight net income for the quarter, which keeps a trend of three consecutive quarters of net income. The neutral business profile reflects Emblem's solid market position in the greater New York City market with a long-standing presence. Additionally, the organization derives a large portion of its membership from union and labor accounts, anchored by the City of New York account. Emblem's ERM is assessed as marginal. While the company has a fully developed ERM program, the organization faced challenges over the years (specifically during Covid periods) in meeting projections and the restoration plan with the New York State Department of Financial Services. Emblem has exceeded the restoration plan projections for the last two years. This press release relates to Credit Ratings that have been published on AM Best's website. For all rating information relating to the release and pertinent disclosures, including details of the office responsible for issuing each of the individual ratings referenced in this release, please see AM Best's Recent Rating Activity web page. For additional information regarding the use and limitations of Credit Rating opinions, please view Guide to Best's Credit Ratings. For information on the proper use of Best's Credit Ratings, Best's Performance Assessments, Best's Preliminary Credit Assessments and AM Best press releases, please view Guide to Proper Use of Best's Ratings & Assessments.


Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Telehealth Isn't a Luxury — It's a Necessity
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Hello, and thank you for joining me today. I'm Dr Alison Kole. I'm boarded in pulmonary critical care and sleep medicine, and I have been practicing for over a decade. I also am the creator and host of the Sleep is My Waking Passion podcast and the medical director of the Oak Health Center Concierge Sleep Telemedicine Program. Today I want to speak directly to you about a critical issue that's occurring in sleep medicine, which is the future of telehealth. There's a lot at stake, and decisions made now will impact patient care for years to come. Some of you may not be aware, but the American Academy of Sleep Medicine [AASM] issued a position statement in February of 2025, urging for the consideration of permanent telehealth services. During the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency waivers allowed for widespread use of telehealth, including coverage for both video- and audio-only visits. This expansion was a lifeline for both patients and providers, and was able to ensure that care continued despite unprecedented times. However, these were temporary waivers and the waivers are set to expire. So, there is a real danger that coverage and reimbursement for telehealth, especially in sleep medicine, could be rolled back. You can think of the AASM's position statement as a call to action. Without permanent coverage in adequate reimbursement, millions could lose access to essential sleep care. And this isn't just a theoretical concern. If telehealth goes away, access will be cut off for many who cannot easily reach in-person services due to a variety of reasons, including geography, mobility, work, or technology barriers. So, why is it that sleep telemedicine is so especially suited to telehealth? There are several reasons for your consideration. Perhaps one of the most obvious reasons is that in order to diagnose sleep disorders, many of us can usually do that without much of a physical exam. Most of our assessments are dependent upon history, sleep diaries, and sleep study data. It's not necessarily a hands-on exam, so this makes remote care both practical and effective in sleep. There's also a couple of other reasons, including our ability to do remote patient monitoring. Most of our CPAP devices allow us to be able to track and see if a patient is being compliant with therapy, but also are they getting effective therapy so that we can triage and make adjustments remotely without the patient needing to come into the office for that. And last but not least, 12% of Americans are living with chronic insomnia in this country. The number-one recommended treatment is cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia. This is a series of visits to a behavioral health specialist that can be time-consuming, and there is data that demonstrate that digital cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia platforms performs almost equivocally to that of in-person visits. There are several benefits to sleep telehealth access, and these include access, equity, safety, and cost. So, let's get into it. Expanded access: What do I mean? Well, telehealth bridges gaps for rural patients, those with mobility challenges, and people who live far from specialty centers. It also allows sleep specialists, such as myself, to serve patients across state lines. With regard to health equity, audio-only telehealth happens to be crucial for patients without reliable internet or smart devices. Cutting this option would disproportionately harm lower-income, elderly, and rural populations. There's also a patient and public safety issue worth considering. Many sleep patients happen to be at higher risk for drowsy driving. Telehealth eliminates the need for these patients to travel, which directly reduces accident risk. This protects not only the patient but also the public. And lastly, there is an economic value to sleep telemedicine services because treating sleep disorders like obstructive sleep apnea saves the healthcare system billions by preventing complications related to chronic comorbid conditions. These include hypertension, heart disease, and diabetes. Telehealth adds further savings by reducing travel time off from work and no-show rates. If telehealth goes away, you're looking at a loss of access, worsening health disparities, reduced public safety and patient safety, as well as higher costs of care for patients. Telemedicine is not a luxury; it's a necessity for modern, equitable, and effective care. As primary care providers, you play a crucial role in advocating for and utilizing these services to ensure your patients get the care they need when and where they need it. If you'd like to check out the completed episode with my interview featuring Dr K. Praveen Vohra, the lead author of the AASM position statement, please check out my YouTube channel,