California imposing sweeping rollback of reopening plans amid case surges

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

QuercusMax wrote: post #48

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The governor's been clear that's part of the intended strategy; counties will be allowed to rush forwards as long as infection rates remain low, and then pull back if infections rise. He's consistently warned that some rollbacks should be expected.

The problem with this strategy is that it's been incredibly confusing; I'm getting whiplash from all the back-and-forth. The news reporting has been bad, as well, not clearly distinguishing between statewide and per-county (or for counties on the "watch list", which changes daily). My friends who are in the service industry have to figure out from day-to-day what they're going to be doing. This is just a giant mess.

Post by pmoriarty » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #54

standardUser wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, when millions and millions of people become infected with an illness there will be a wide range of edge cases. But if reinfection within 6 months was anything other than exceptionally rare it would be obvious by now. Now if you had a peer reviewed study to link instead of media reports, I would be very interested.

Not sure why you’re getting downvoted. Seropositive tests have show the vast majority develop an immune response, how long that lasts we don’t know, but even if it’s only 6 months, that will reduce spread. You don’t create an epidemic plan based on edge cases. And it’s important to note that the tests are looking for viral RNA. Viral RNA can be found even if virus are inactivated in the absence of an active infection…

Post by TheTruestKyle » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 9:32 PM UTC

heimatau wrote: post #43

I'm very grateful for the rollbacks. I was against Newsome but how he's handled this pandemic is better than both Dems/Repubs. I understand he felt he was too 'heavy-handed' in the beginning but it was the correct decision. But...he's trying to appease the 'center' by allowing counties freedom to make decisions. Regardless, he's doing the right thing and I'm glad I moved here a few years ago. In conclusion, I hope Ga…

Post by nogabebop23 » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 9:37 PM UTC

QuercusMax wrote: post #48

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The governor's been clear that's part of the intended strategy; counties will be allowed to rush forwards as long as infection rates remain low, and then pull back if infections rise. He's consistently warned that some rollbacks should be expected.

The problem with this strategy is that it's been incredibly confusing; I'm getting whiplash from all the back-and-forth. The news reporting has been bad, as well, not clearly distinguishing between statewide and per-county (or for counties on the "watch list", which changes daily). My friends who are in the service industry have to figure out from day-to-day what they're going to be doing. This is just a giant mess.

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Jul 13, 2020, 9:41 PM UTC

DataWorker wrote: post #31

AlexandrB wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The effectiveness of a middle ground strategy is pure conjecture. Canada shut down fast and hard - like California - and is not seeing cases spike. Perhaps because we re-opened slowly and people are still generally cautious - wearing masks in public and maintaining social distance. Or perhaps because we have not been getting wildly mixed messages from local/provincial/national leaders about the severity of the situat…

It was all middle ground strategy from day one. The national lockdown was timed to the nyc wave and that was a probably a mistake depending on how you view the purpose of the lockdown. If it was to flatten the curve, outside of nyc, we did too much too soon and are now reaping the effects of “precaution fatigue.” It’s a marathon rather than a sprint, but each region, has its own race to run on it’s own timeline, it’s…