4 ms·

The first official case was in March. The actual first case was at the beginning of January. The shelter in place order means the city failed to anticipate and

by Vomzor 6y ago

The first official case was in March. The actual first case was at the beginning of January. The shelter in place order means the city failed to anticipate and acted when it was too late. Like the rest of the Western world.

jennyyang 6y ago
No. San Francisco was the first to act, and put pressure on the rest of the Bay Area to follow, and subsequently California. If SF didn't act first, who knows how long it would have taken for other politicians to have the "courage" to put in such draconian, but effective, measures. As far as I'm concerned, London Breed saved tens of thousands of lives in the Bay Area alone, and I hate her politics.
- Vomzor 6y ago
  The time to act was in January. It’s good that they acted first but it was still too late.
  - djcapelis 6y ago
    They did act in January. SF’s emergency operations center was active and running. The CDC was still making it illegal for anyone to test outside some unreliable and faulty test kits. The fact that our federal government was obstructing anyone’s ability to build up a testing apparatus is very much the responsibility of the incompetent management of this crisis by the federal government.
- mattm 6y ago
  Actually a lot of large tech companies acted earlier and had already implemented work from home orders by the time the city acted.
djcapelis 6y ago
> The actual first case was at the beginning of January. Receipts please. You are claiming that the timeline of SF matched other countries where deaths started much earlier and went much higher. Are you really making the claim that our hospitals were overlooking a couple hundred people drowning in their own lungs and unable to breath during the month of February? Because that would basically have to have been true if we had community spread in early January. > The shelter in place order means the city failed to anticipate and acted when it was too late. Like the rest of the Western world. Your assumption is that the death rate being substantially lower in SF and California is luck and not preparation? That stance doesn’t seem supported by the evidence.
- Vomzor 6y ago
  It’s only logical. There are typically 90 weekly roundtrip flights operating between SFO and China or Hong Kong. But somehow no one was infected for two months? Lol. What I’m saying is that if the West acted like Taiwan there would be no lockdowns. They acted, they were prepared. Western world was caught with its pants down, including San Francisco. https://sfist.com/2020/04/10/some-scientists-suggest-undetected-coronavirus-caused-californias-oddly-early-flu-season/ https://sfist.com/2020/04/10/some-scientists-suggest-undetec...
  - djcapelis 6y ago
    Sure. Let’s learn lessons from Taiwan too that sounds great to me. (Taiwan activated its health department epidemic operations center on January 20th. SF activated January 21st. If SF had been able to use state and federal powers, we probably would have had a much better shot at avoiding shelter in place.)

by Vomzor 6y ago

jennyyang 6y ago

No. San Francisco was the first to act, and put pressure on the rest of the Bay Area to follow, and subsequently California. If SF didn't act first, who knows how long it would have taken for other politicians to have the "courage" to put in such draconian, but effective, measures. As far as I'm concerned, London Breed saved tens of thousands of lives in the Bay Area alone, and I hate her politics.

Vomzor 6y ago
The time to act was in January. It’s good that they acted first but it was still too late.
- djcapelis 6y ago
  They did act in January. SF’s emergency operations center was active and running. The CDC was still making it illegal for anyone to test outside some unreliable and faulty test kits. The fact that our federal government was obstructing anyone’s ability to build up a testing apparatus is very much the responsibility of the incompetent management of this crisis by the federal government.
mattm 6y ago
Actually a lot of large tech companies acted earlier and had already implemented work from home orders by the time the city acted.

djcapelis 6y ago

> The actual first case was at the beginning of January. Receipts please. You are claiming that the timeline of SF matched other countries where deaths started much earlier and went much higher. Are you really making the claim that our hospitals were overlooking a couple hundred people drowning in their own lungs and unable to breath during the month of February? Because that would basically have to have been true if we had community spread in early January. > The shelter in place order means the city failed to anticipate and acted when it was too late. Like the rest of the Western world. Your assumption is that the death rate being substantially lower in SF and California is luck and not preparation? That stance doesn’t seem supported by the evidence.

Vomzor 6y ago
It’s only logical. There are typically 90 weekly roundtrip flights operating between SFO and China or Hong Kong. But somehow no one was infected for two months? Lol. What I’m saying is that if the West acted like Taiwan there would be no lockdowns. They acted, they were prepared. Western world was caught with its pants down, including San Francisco. https://sfist.com/2020/04/10/some-scientists-suggest-undetected-coronavirus-caused-californias-oddly-early-flu-season/ https://sfist.com/2020/04/10/some-scientists-suggest-undetec...
- djcapelis 6y ago
  Sure. Let’s learn lessons from Taiwan too that sounds great to me. (Taiwan activated its health department epidemic operations center on January 20th. SF activated January 21st. If SF had been able to use state and federal powers, we probably would have had a much better shot at avoiding shelter in place.)