Coronavirus (Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange: weight loss, bridge, union)

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Robertfchew

Newscum says the virus doesn't take the 4th of July weekend off lol Somehow it knew to lay off the rioters tho. How convenient .

Rioters? Is that the new Trumpian word for protesters? If so, it's been proven that protesters did not cause the spike in cases. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybe.../#65c895087dac

[Mike930]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Rioters? Is that the new Trumpian word for protesters? If so, it's been proven that protesters did not cause the spike in cases. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybe.../#65c895087dac

As far as protesting goes, saying they didn’t cause an increase in cases doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. That Forbes article cites a study done by economists. So economists are now making medical conclusions?

I also heavily scoff at the finding that protesters increased social distancing because as people protested, more people stayed home. First of all, lol, what???? The lead author is actually saying that people were driven off the streets by the protesting and that increased social distancing?? What’s that guy smoking? Any photos, including the one the used for the article, shows a spectacular lack of social distancing.

When this first started there were people who said this was like the flu, then the experts said no, it’s way more contagious among other things. And this study is seriously trying to say thousands of people jammed together isn’t a problem? Well, hell, let’s throw everything open then!

Sorry, not buying it.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by Mike930

As far as protesting goes, saying they didn’t cause an increase in cases doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. That Forbes article cites a study done by economists. So economists are now making medical conclusions?

I also heavily scoff at the finding that protesters increased social distancing because as people protested, more people stayed home. First of all, lol, what???? The lead author is actually saying that people were driven off the streets by the protesting and that increased social distancing?? What’s that guy smoking? Any photos, including the one the used for the article, shows a spectacular lack of social distancing.

When this first started there were people who said this was like the flu, then the experts said no, it’s way more contagious among other things. And this study is seriously trying to say thousands of people jammed together isn’t a problem? Well, hell, let’s throw everything open then!

Sorry, not buying it.

Wait, they are stating that "protesting" gets people to stay in their houses? Are they protesting on twitter?

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by Mike930

San Diego isn’t on the list of counties it affects, so the zoos, restaurants, etc aren’t affected by this order.

Okay.

Watch a bunch of people from LA and other Southern California counties spend the holiday in San Diego. It then will be on the list soon.

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by Mike930

They’re saying that now. It wasn’t the case months ago when Newsom closed beaches in OC because of crowds.

It was 6 weeks ago, and the medical consensus wasn't as clear. Furthermore, the beach closures are only for a few days because it's people crowding around others for hours that makes it risky despite likely bright sun.

I think zoos and some other spots are closed because of that and tourists.

[Mike930]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Wait, they are stating that "protesting" gets people to stay in their houses? Are they protesting on twitter?

They meant that people stayed off the streets to avoid the protesters, which increased social distancing. I don’t even know how to address that level of stupidity. Here’s a paragraph from the article:

“The study’s lead author, Dhaval Dave of Bentley University, said, “In many cities, the protests actually seemed to lead to a net increase in social distancing, as more people who did not protest decided to stay off the streets.””

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Mike930

As far as protesting goes, saying they didn’t cause an increase in cases doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. That Forbes article cites a study done by economists. So economists are now making medical conclusions?

I also heavily scoff at the finding that protesters increased social distancing because as people protested, more people stayed home. First of all, lol, what???? The lead author is actually saying that people were driven off the streets by the protesting and that increased social distancing?? What’s that guy smoking? Any photos, including the one the used for the article, shows a spectacular lack of social distancing.

When this first started there were people who said this was like the flu, then the experts said no, it’s way more contagious among other things. And this study is seriously trying to say thousands of people jammed together isn’t a problem? Well, hell, let’s throw everything open then!

Sorry, not buying it.

Then you probably will not believe this either.

Protests probably didn’t lead to coronavirus spikes, but it’s hard to know for sure
Now, some public health officials and disease trackers say there appears to be scant evidence the protests sparked widespread outbreaks. Others say that because many states reopened about the same time as the protests, and because of the limits of contact tracing, they simply can’t say for sure.

As protests were building across the nation, hundreds of public health experts signed a letter arguing systemic racism is a public health crisis, too, and that protests were therefore worth the risk — even as many of them warned that protests could spread the virus. Cities hurried to set up testing facilities near protest sites to identify cases early.

The number of positive coronavirus tests in recent weeks have grown almost unchecked in many parts of the country. Hospitals in Arizona, California and Texas are stretched to the breaking point. Governors are resorting to the once politically unthinkable measure of shutting businesses again. But most experts say the protests are probably not to blame, or almost certainly not the only thing to blame in places where cases are soaring.

Absent a few positive tests among protesters announced here and there, the only major outbreak tied to protests happened in South Carolina, where organizers postponed demonstrations or moved them online after at least 13 people who took part in previous protests tested positive.

Meanwhile, data from other cities suggests protests have not been followed by an increase in cases of covid-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. Minneapolis, where Floyd was killed and where the protests began, has registered a steady decrease in case numbers this month.

According to Minneapolis Department of Health spokesman Doug Schultz, more than 15,000 people were tested at centers the city set up in communities affected by the protests, and 1.7 percent of tests came back positive — below the statewide average of about 3.6 percent. Health systems in the area that tested thousands of people who attended the demonstrations returned positivity rates of less than 1 percent.
Schultz said officials believe the low infection rates reflect that the protests were outside, that most people wore masks and that people spent most of their time in motion, circulating through the crowd.

Officials in New York and Philadelphia have drawn similar conclusions and say they see no evidence of cases accumulating because of the protests.

In Seattle; Portland, Ore.; and Oakland, Calif. — cities experiencing a coronavirus resurgence — officials have asked people testing positive whether they attended protests, and few said they had. Neetu Balram, a spokeswoman for Alameda County, which includes Oakland, said officials there figured they would have identified signs of a demonstration-related outbreak by now but haven’t.

The same is true in Seattle. Out of more than 1,000 positive tests in recent weeks, 34 of the people testing positive said they attended a protest or mass gathering since late May, according to King County Health Officer Jeff Duchin. Nearly 3,000 people who said they were at protests have been tested by the city, and fewer than 1 percent were positive, Duchin said https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...4c6_story.html

[Mike930]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

It was 6 weeks ago, and the medical consensus wasn't as clear. Furthermore, the beach closures are only for a few days because it's people crowding around others for hours that makes it risky despite likely bright sun.

I think zoos and some other spots are closed because of that and tourists.

Yeah that could be. Even so, counties still have leeway to act even without Newsom’s restrictions. San Diego decided to close bars unless they serve food. Even then, all restaurants have to close at 10 PM.

[Mike930]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Then you probably will not believe this either.

You’re right. I don’t. Plus it’s not simply a matter of not believing. Some cities were actively avoiding asking people who tested positive if they attended protests. I said it before. Skew the data and the conclusions are worthless.

If the virus respects the protests to stay away, why wouldn’t they ask people if they protested?

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by Mike930

Yeah that could be. Even so, counties still have leeway to act even without Newsom’s restrictions. San Diego decided to close bars unless they serve food. Even then, all restaurants have to close at 10 PM.

That helps.

It's crystal-clear to me that some local politicians are scared to act and want Newsom to do it for them.