San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders • Hacker News Board

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#121

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 5:56 AM UTC

x3n0ph3n3 wrote: post #116

jeffbee wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're confused because the county health information system is being mismanaged and misused as a blog by a crank. He doesn't allow anyone to send public information on his behalf and he requires all of his writings to be distributed verbatim[1]. That's why they all read like incoherent rambles. It's also why every one of his messages begins with the instructions to "reread my previous statements below", because he's…

I think you confuse clarity with oversimplification. Nothing he's written so far makes him sound like a crank.

[deleted]

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#122

Post by newusr1207 » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 5:56 AM UTC

garmaine wrote: post #96

xfitm3 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn't be a goal. The virus cannot be stopped with our current medical technology, but you can certainly punish people into poverty and homelessness with draconian lockdowns.

You say it is not possible, but it absolutely is as it has happened. There are countries in this world which have had community spread and then stamped the virus out entirely, like Taiwan and New Zealand have. There are countries which have been in as bad a situation as we are (like Australia and South Korea) and then gotten their numbers down to the point where TW/NZ were at their peak. So there is a pathway from ra…

These countries you mention are vastly different in terms of population size and geography.

Also, pretending that there are no costs associated with strict lockdowns is terribly flawed.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#123

Post by paganel » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 5:58 AM UTC

sidibe wrote: post #61

I understand the sentiment, but I think it's pretty clear in retrospect hard lockdowns were the correct way to address this. This half-assed "wear a mask and social distance if you want" stance just made the economy sputter for a whole a year. I've seen this in France twice, where they've oscillated between doing nothing and doing a lot, a couple brief lockdowns can reverse things quickly even after things have gotte…

The Czech Republic and Bulgaria had harder/more restrictive lockdowns during the entire year compared to my country (Romania) and yet they have a death-rate higher than ours. Indeed, they managed to ride the first wave pretty much unscathed, but the second one looks like it hit both of them comparatively harder than it hit us.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#124

Post by mattigames » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 5:58 AM UTC

adinosaur123 wrote: post #82

avalys wrote: post #17

Wow. Lest anyone think that Dr. Morrow is some kind of anti-lockdown activist - back in the spring, San Mateo county had one of the most restrictive and prescriptive lockdowns of anywhere in the US (residents were ordered to limit outdoor recreation to within 5 miles of their home). 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 f…

> "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?” There's been a total of 164 registered COVID-19 related deaths in San Francisco county, the vast majority of which had other comorbidities, assuming trend[1]. On the other…

I disagree: overdoses in 2018 killed 259, in 2019 it killed 441, so I don't think it was really surprising to get around 550 for this year.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#125

Post by daveFNbuck » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 5:59 AM UTC

shostack wrote: post #83

daveFNbuck wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in San Mateo county, and am interested in knowing what to do to stay safe. This is the first I've heard about limiting outdoor recreation to within 5 miles of my home. I haven't been notified about any of the details of any of the lockdowns. In the Spring, I encountered a group of people who had just been released from jail during one of my monthly shopping trips. Despite having just been in government custody…

What have you tried to stay notified about details? the SMCAlert system texts and emails me links to details as soon as any changes occur. It has been fantastic for this and other situations. https://hsd.smcsheriff.com/smcalert

I tried a lot. I spent a good amount of time searching for what the restrictions were in my city. I found news articles describing restrictions, but I wasn't able to locate primary sources or a way to keep updated.

Even with the link you sent me, that site gives no indication that it's a way to get updates on pandemic-related news and restrictions. It seems to just be an emergency subscription. What other messages does it send that aren't described in the FAQs?

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#126

Post by fludlight » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 6:03 AM UTC

remote_phone wrote: post #106

heleninboodler wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly with all three of your points. I disagree strongly with one of his positions (I don't think we should be opening schools while the rest of us are locked down), but I too find it very, very encouraging to have a public official obviously using his brain and being honest about the fact that nobody really knows the right answer. And especially in the context about the use of power, the acknowledge…

Places like UK did a hard lockdown for 6 weeks and kept schools open. It completely worked. Yes, kids can transmit the virus, but it appears that as long as the ADULTS limit their interaction with other adults, kids have only a limited way of encountering infections.

Kid1->Kid2->Parents-of-kid2 transmission sounds like it would lead to a lot of orphans. Did it? What's the lag on the statistics on that subject?

Outcomes are also not binary (life or death). There is also the possibility of a gamut of lifelong health problems from, e.g. scarred lungs, for both kids and parents.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#127

Post by dehrmann » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 6:04 AM UTC

sidibe wrote: post #61

I understand the sentiment, but I think it's pretty clear in retrospect hard lockdowns were the correct way to address this. This half-assed "wear a mask and social distance if you want" stance just made the economy sputter for a whole a year. I've seen this in France twice, where they've oscillated between doing nothing and doing a lot, a couple brief lockdowns can reverse things quickly even after things have gotte…

Europe had hard lockdowns. Not China-hard, but pretty hard. Cases surged again.

You mentioned Asia. I saw this headline today:

"South Korea's Health Minister Describes Seoul As A 'COVID-19 War Zone'"

By US standards, their case count is still incredibly low. The point is they haven't actually been able to contain it, either; they're just acting sooner and more aggressively for the second wave. Apparently New Zealand still has single digit cases most days.

If "half-assed 'wear a mask and social distance if you want'" kept the r0 below 1, lockdown or not, new cases would drop.

What's scarier is that the Bay Area, with ubiquitous masks, good-ish weather, partial closures, and lower population wasn't even able to keep new cases down.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#128

Post by chipotle_coyote » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 6:05 AM UTC

heshiebee wrote: post #78

ghayes wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would agree that people "making their own decisions" do affect others, though, correct?

I do believe that most people are responsible enough to take the recommended precautions and encourage their friends and family to do the same and not endanger others. The only outcome I see here is like one of prohibition. Our country was built on trust, integrity and distribution of power, much of this is the opposite in the name of public health when the numbers show otherwise. Closing outdoor dining but letting t…

> I do believe that most people are responsible enough to take the recommended precautions and encourage their friends and family to do the same and not endanger others.

I know I'm being the "[citation needed]" guy again, but the COVID-19 case numbers in the United States just don't seem like they support this optimistic take. If it were true, we should be closer to the median -- if not below it -- then we are.

I'm not honestly sure where you're going with the Prohibition comparison; your anecdotal examples seem to be "they're telling you to follow these restrictions but they're not following them themselves," which, okay, I guess, but they're still just anecdotes. Is this "they TOLD us not to have liquor during Prohibition, but there were county commissioners who were SNEAKING INTO SPEAKEASIES!"? I mean, sure, probably, but the comparison kind of breaks down at that point. Prohibition was based on a puritanical moral panic; our current pandemic-era lockdowns are based on a very real, highly contagious lethal disease.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#129

Post by enraged_camel » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 6:07 AM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #127

sidibe wrote: post #61

I understand the sentiment, but I think it's pretty clear in retrospect hard lockdowns were the correct way to address this. This half-assed "wear a mask and social distance if you want" stance just made the economy sputter for a whole a year. I've seen this in France twice, where they've oscillated between doing nothing and doing a lot, a couple brief lockdowns can reverse things quickly even after things have gotte…

Europe had hard lockdowns. Not China-hard, but pretty hard. Cases surged again. You mentioned Asia. I saw this headline today: "South Korea's Health Minister Describes Seoul As A 'COVID-19 War Zone'" By US standards, their case count is still incredibly low. The point is they haven't actually been able to contain it, either; they're just acting sooner and more aggressively for the second wave. Apparently New Zealand…

>> Europe had hard lockdowns. Not China-hard, but pretty hard. Cases surged again.

Well yeah, after the first wave people threw all caution to the wind and decided to go back to their old habits. So of course cases are surging again.

This isn’t rocket science. Not sure why everyone is pretending there’s some sort of huge mystery. We know how the virus spreads.

Re: San Mateo County Health Officer Statement on Bay Area Stay-at-Home Orders

#130

Post by wwweston » Tue, Dec 08, 2020, 6:14 AM UTC

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #109

mehrdadn wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am aware of no data that some of the business activities [...] are the major drivers of transmission This suggests he is aware of data indicating that some of the business activities being restricted drive transmission, just not all of them. (I'm guessing maybe, say, indoor dining?) So should those known to do this be restricted or not? Did restricting them previously help or not? Should we ignore them?

It seems to be fairly well established at this point that poor ventilation is an issue; spending time around others who may be carrying the virus is an issue; wearing a mask, whether inside or outside, significantly reduces the chance of spreading the virus if you're a carrier. So your guess seems pretty on point. Indoor dining/drinking means being around others without masks in areas where air is circulated rather t…

> And there are some other restrictions which just seem more like theatre, such as curfews. Do we think coronavirus is nocturnal?

The way I've heard some people explain it is that human behavior changes nocturnaly. After 10pm what are most people doing out? Nightlife and drinking overlap pretty heavily, social drinking and social distancing are kindof contradictory, and alcohol isn't known for increasing people's capacity for conscientious observance of safety practices.