Jobs, housing possible key factors in boroughs’ higher infection rates
Montrealers’ employment and the type of housing they live in are emerging as potential key factors in why certain boroughs are experiencing far higher rates of COVID -19 infection.
“One of the things that jumps to my mind is where people who live in that borough are working,” said Erin Strumpf, an associate professor in Mcgill’s department of epidemiology, biostatistics and occupational health.
“Even if it’s not necessarily low-income families, if you have a high share of people in that borough who work in essential service — and it could be health care, it could be grocery stores, it could be trash collection — those people have been going to work every day over the past two months while some of us in other boroughs have been sitting in our houses, working from our homes.” And they may have brought it home.
Statistics released by Montreal’s public health department Tuesday support that theory. In three of the most affected boroughs — Montreal North, Villeray— Saint-michel—park-extension and Rivière-des-prairies—pointeaux-trembles — health-care workers make up a large proportion of those who have tested positive, ranging from 24 to 27 per cent of all COVID -19 cases, as compared to the Montreal average of 19 per cent.
While Montreal North and Villeray—saint-michel—park-extension have higher than average rates of low-income households and dense housing that likely also plays a part, only 12 per cent of residents in Rivière-des-prairies—pointeaux-trembles are considered low-income earners, far below the Montreal average of 21 per cent. But the borough has the highest rate of infected residents who are health-care workers on the island — 27 per cent. And it has one of the highest infection rates.
Given the high rate of cases in seniors’ residences, the number of residences in a borough is another factor, Strumpf said.
The type of housing in a borough, as opposed to just the population density of the neighbourhoods, is also at play, said Kevin Manaugh, associate professor in Mcgill’s department of geography.
“It’s clear some of it is the built form of the neighbourhoods and the kinds of housing that is very much driving this,” Manaugh said. “In places where people are forced onto an elevator or a stairway or an entrance to a highrise building, you’re multiplying all of the vectors of the disease in terms of people being in close proximity to each other.
“If you look at the most recent numbers, there are almost two to three times more cases in Park Extension and Montreal North compared to Westmount and other places.”
Problematic sectors also suffer from a dearth of green spaces and wide sidewalks, Manaugh said.
Some neighbourhoods are dense but have many residences with separate entranceways, limiting transmission. In Plateau-mont-royal, one of Montreal’s most densely populated boroughs, the rate of infection is far lower than the city average. It also has a low percentage of infected health-care workers.
In Côte-des-neiges, another hot spot, 73 per cent of residents are renters, noted Fo Niemi, director of Montreal’s Center for Research-action on Race Relations. It also has a high percentage of people living below the poverty line, and U.S. studies have shown a direct relation between low-income communities and vulnerability to disease outbreaks, due in part to housing density.
Residents in large housing projects or packed apartments don’t have the luxury of social distancing, observed UQAM biological sciences professor and virologist Benoit Barbeau. He stressed it was too early to identify definitive causes, but noted another factor that could influence infection rates.
“Chance,” he said. “The Montreal metropolitan region is very large, but that doesn’t stop the fact it takes just one or two people to be infected and end up in an environment where, for some reason, it explodes.”
Particularly since so called “super-spreaders” might not show any symptoms, he noted.