11–20 of 292 posts
I personally think the whole country should focus more on the greater good for everyone by culling the virus instead of doing this open-nd-close back and forth juggling, as to optimize for the best outcome available (similar to New Zealand). But then again I am not well versed on the Nash equilibrium when it comes to highly infectious diseases.
If the consensus of the region is net wrong, then we are irrationally sacrificing our regional economic health, and we are certainly also trading lives in the other direction as well. All policy choices from here have the price of blood.
I don't accept the position that a policy without robust enforcement is a non-policy, as I think government largely works by a compliant population that trusts their leadership; however, as it becomes increasingly apparent that some wins are purchased by the losses of others, the disparity will brew acute resentment.
This is a surprisingly coherent. I live in San Mateo County. One thing I've noticed is that the cases are not evenly distributed. California has 600/1M new cases, vs 1000/M in South Dakota. LA county has 740/1M. San Mateo County has 313/1M. Within San Mateo County, San Carlos is 119/1M, and East Palo Alto is 675/1M. It's incredibly hard to set policy when everything is so different, down to towns with 30K people a fe…
East Palo Alto and San Jose could be either from pop-density, or from relative # of poor people.
Everyone living in a multi-generational household with e.g. grocery store clerks is at significantly higher risk than a couple of childless yuppies working from home.
Even aside from his particular recommendations, I can't remember the last time I heard a government official talk like an actual human being in this manner. A breath of fresh air.
I'm based in Australia, Victoria (population of 6m+, exceeding the 800k mentioned in the Bay Area [EDIT: San Mateo county]) and we have now had over 30 days of zero cases of coronavirus, after having a peak of 680+ per day [1].
We went into a tough lockdown, stamped out the virus, and are slowly easing restrictions. We are working towards a "COVID normal" holiday season.
We had stay at home orders, restricted access to shops (supermarkets remained open but most closed, with one trip per day per household), social distancing orders, and months of wearing masks, and 10-20,000 COVID tests performed per day (again, free).
Our Premier Daniel Andrews faced a lot of criticism for pushing this hard, and it was a lot of pressure on small businesses and the mental health of citizens, but ultimately it was the right decision -- the alternative was untenable, let it become out of control and watch our (universal, free) health care become overwhelmed, and no one would even be able to do anything -- an acceptance of the virus flourishing was not acceptable.
If you don't have a leader capable of fighting this virus, get rid of them. It's frustrating and sad watching from afar this virus run amuck in the United States (and the health care system failing you - I'd _never_ want your insurance system anywhere near me - but that's another battle).
I hope and wish for the health of everyone affected by this pandemic.
[1] https://www.dhhs.vic.gov.au/victorian-coronavirus-covid-19-d...
It takes a lot of guts to just look objectively at the data and do what you think is right, regardless of what pressure you’re getting from the media, the state, the governor, your peers in other counties, etc. Not to mention, publicly call out the defects and contradictions in the state level orders. Much respect for this man.
> “But what we have before us is a symbolic gesture, it appears to be style over substance, without any hint of enforcement, and I simply don’t believe it will do much good. I think people should stay at home, avoid all non-essential activities, wear masks, and not gather with anyone outside their households. I’ve been saying this for about 10 months now. If you didn’t listen to my (and many others) entreaties before, I don’t think you’ll likely change your behavior based on a new order.”
> “Being in the purple tier, the State has already put significant restrictions on businesses and the public space in San Mateo County. I am aware of no data that some of the business activities on which even greater restrictions are being put into place with this new order are the major drivers of transmission. In fact, I think these greater restrictions are likely to drive more activity indoors, a much riskier endeavor. While I don’t have scientific evidence to support this, I also believe these greater restrictions will result in more job loss, more hunger, more despair and desperation (...) and more death from causes other than COVID. And I wonder, are these premature deaths any less worrisome than COVID deaths?”
I was searching for research around the infection risk associated with various activities (outdoor vs indoor dining / gyms etc). Was hoping to see arguments motivated by contact-tracing data. Wasn't able to find much. Did anyone else have better luck?
You will not find much if any based on contact tracing data. Typical participation in CT isn’t remotely close to “I ate at x restaurant on y day”, and the entities tasked with CT are often inadequately equipped to handle the volumes/technical capacity of such a task.
There is, however, a wealth of literature using cell phone mobility, such as shown above.
Great read. (resident in San Mateo County here) I personally think the whole country should focus more on the greater good for everyone by culling the virus instead of doing this open-nd-close back and forth juggling, as to optimize for the best outcome available (similar to New Zealand). But then again I am not well versed on the Nash equilibrium when it comes to highly infectious diseases.
This is a surprisingly coherent. I live in San Mateo County. One thing I've noticed is that the cases are not evenly distributed. California has 600/1M new cases, vs 1000/M in South Dakota. LA county has 740/1M. San Mateo County has 313/1M. Within San Mateo County, San Carlos is 119/1M, and East Palo Alto is 675/1M. It's incredibly hard to set policy when everything is so different, down to towns with 30K people a fe…
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/12/03/california-health-official...