3 ms·

There are more places than Alameda County that need those things.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Certainly true! I hope those places get what they need soon. But if Alameda County can safely start reopening before them, I don't see any value in waiting.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Citation needed. Where is the testing capacity needed to meet Bay Area criteria to reopen? It wasn't there as of 2 days ago: https://abc7news.com/health/how-close-is-the-bay-area-to-reopening-track-progress-here/6186554/ https://abc7news.com/health/how-close-is-the-bay-area-to-reo... Nor were PPE requirements met.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    All Bay Area counties other than Santa Clara have interpreted the Bay Area criteria as criteria to fully reopen, so they're admittedly not at the 200 per 100,000 number. But I don't see any reason to second-guess their decision that a partial reopening is safe with fewer tests. Unfortunately, Alameda County doesn't publish daily test counts or anything, so the best citation I have for you is a random news article[1] asserting they're 1/3 of the way to 3100 tests per day. [1] https://www.kqed.org/science/1963889/coronavirus-some-bay-area-counties-are-about-to-open-up-more-heres-where-your-county-stands https://www.kqed.org/science/1963889/coronavirus-some-bay-ar...
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      And, reopening with 1/3 of the testing capacity necessary to do so seems wise to you? I hope you don't have any elderly relatives in the area, or any health conditions that would predispose you to a severe case.
      - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        I don't agree with the premise. Remember that the full reopening will include extremely high-contact locations like schools, restaurants, bars, and movie theaters. It seems plausible that a limited reopening of only retail and manufacturing is safe with a third of the full amount.
        pmiller2 6y ago
        Citation needed.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        There's no way to rigorously determine how many tests are needed. The original threshold was an educated guess, and the new phased reopening policy is a different educated guess; all we'll ever have available is educated guesses. The best possible citation is that health officers across the Bay Area have said it's time to start reopening.
        pmiller2 6y ago
        So, you don't believe we can answer that question with modeling? You don't believe these testing capacity numbers were constructed by public health officials using the best available modeling data? Is that what you're saying? Or, are you saying you're qualified to guess that 1/3 of the required number is sufficient for phase 2 opening?
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        I believe that, whatever process they went through to generate the first set of numbers, they went through that same process to determine it's safe to reopen now. 1/3 doesn't seem like such an obviously wrong number that I have to suspect undue influence.
        pmiller2 6y ago

Certainly true! I hope those places get what they need soon. But if Alameda County can safely start reopening before them, I don't see any value in waiting.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
pmiller2 6y ago
Citation needed. Where is the testing capacity needed to meet Bay Area criteria to reopen? It wasn't there as of 2 days ago: https://abc7news.com/health/how-close-is-the-bay-area-to-reopening-track-progress-here/6186554/ https://abc7news.com/health/how-close-is-the-bay-area-to-reo... Nor were PPE requirements met.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  All Bay Area counties other than Santa Clara have interpreted the Bay Area criteria as criteria to fully reopen, so they're admittedly not at the 200 per 100,000 number. But I don't see any reason to second-guess their decision that a partial reopening is safe with fewer tests. Unfortunately, Alameda County doesn't publish daily test counts or anything, so the best citation I have for you is a random news article[1] asserting they're 1/3 of the way to 3100 tests per day. [1] https://www.kqed.org/science/1963889/coronavirus-some-bay-area-counties-are-about-to-open-up-more-heres-where-your-county-stands https://www.kqed.org/science/1963889/coronavirus-some-bay-ar...
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    And, reopening with 1/3 of the testing capacity necessary to do so seems wise to you? I hope you don't have any elderly relatives in the area, or any health conditions that would predispose you to a severe case.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      I don't agree with the premise. Remember that the full reopening will include extremely high-contact locations like schools, restaurants, bars, and movie theaters. It seems plausible that a limited reopening of only retail and manufacturing is safe with a third of the full amount.
      - pmiller2 6y ago
        Citation needed.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        There's no way to rigorously determine how many tests are needed. The original threshold was an educated guess, and the new phased reopening policy is a different educated guess; all we'll ever have available is educated guesses. The best possible citation is that health officers across the Bay Area have said it's time to start reopening.
        pmiller2 6y ago
        So, you don't believe we can answer that question with modeling? You don't believe these testing capacity numbers were constructed by public health officials using the best available modeling data? Is that what you're saying? Or, are you saying you're qualified to guess that 1/3 of the required number is sufficient for phase 2 opening?
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        I believe that, whatever process they went through to generate the first set of numbers, they went through that same process to determine it's safe to reopen now. 1/3 doesn't seem like such an obviously wrong number that I have to suspect undue influence.
        pmiller2 6y ago