4 ms·

I recently learned that SF still has an indoor mask mandate, despite high vaccination rates and a low rate of new cases. Are restrictions like that still common

I recently learned that SF still has an indoor mask mandate, despite high vaccination rates and a low rate of new cases. Are restrictions like that still common in other parts of CA? Is that part of what's hampering the recovery?

dv_dt 5y ago
Yes my so cal county brought back indoor mask mandates. Btw according to recent press releases CA is the state with the lowest new case rate also. I don’t think it’s hampering the recovery, people are going into work, shopping and eating out more than a few months ago as far as I can tell.
ZetaZero 5y ago
EDIT: you guys cant take a joke
- standardUser 5y ago
  My only point of comparison is NY, where we've had virtually no restrictions for many months. Hence my curiosity.
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  Ah yes… the circular, self-referential argument for all these restrictions. Cases down? Keep the restrictions, they clearly are working! Cases up? Keep the restrictions, we still need them! And the cycle continues forever. Nowhere does anybody actually ask “do the restrictions actually work?”. The answer seems to be “not really”. Compare data and see for yourself: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/ https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/
tunesmith 5y ago
According to one API I follow, SF county's Rt is slightly below 1, which means its case count is halving fairly slowly... and its cases/100k is still slightly above 10, which is CDC's benchmark for prevalence. They're probably on the verge of being able to relax some mitigation measures, but those mitigation measures are what keeps those numbers low, so that requires a big degree of caution. I definitely wouldn't say they are being too conservative with it, they're just on the verge of being able to relax a smidge.
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  > They're probably on the verge of being able to relax some mitigation measures, but those mitigation measures are what keeps those numbers low, so that requires a big degree of caution. This circular logic makes me tear my hair out. "Cases down? Lockdowns are working! Can't stop now" "Cases up? We need to keep these lockdowns!". There is zero exit criteria in this logic, which is why we are trapped in this vicious cycle of unending restrictions. It's the exact same argument as "Is it raining? Yes? It means rain dances work! Better keep doing them!" and "It is raining? No? It means we haven't done enough rain dances!" And all these restrictions might as well be rain dances at this point. It is just shit people threw against the wall in some panic'd attempt to "do something". Nobody seems to care if any of it works and asking questions is met with vicious attack.
  - tunesmith 5y ago
    There's nothing circular about that. If Rt is above 1, mitigation will need to happen somehow - whether through natural immunity, death, vaccination, masks, distancing, whatever - until Rt goes below 1. If Rt is below 1, mitigation measures can be relaxed up to the point where Rt goes above 1 again. I personally look at four metrics - ICU capacity above/below 85%, test positive ratio above/below 5%, Rt above/below 1, and Case prevalence above/below 10/100k. If all four are below, then I'm hosting parties with my vaccinated friends. Otherwise, I'm trying not to contribute to spread.
  - somethoughts 5y ago
    I think "the rain dances cause rain circular logic" would be true if (and a big if) it weren't for other states trying different, less strict strategies. Clearly some states are explicitly not rain dancing and are facing headwinds. And that's the beauty of state and to some extent even more locally based strategies versus national mandates. As long as there is a national agreed upon mechanism for measurement - its actually quite great that some states are willing to be guinea pigs and their citizenry are willing to go with different riskier strategies and experiments. In fact the steadfastness and persistence of some states sticking to their strategies even in the face of significant headwinds is a plus as it creates an even richer dataset for research and analysis. The headwinds these states are facing provides assurance to those in states with the stricter mandates that the mandates aren't just a pure power grab and government control and actually do have a benefit that is measurable.
conk 5y ago
How does a mask mandate impact economic recovery?
- standardUser 5y ago
  That is an example of a restriction that surprised me, so I am asking if there are also other restrictions that might be impeding the recovery, and how widespread they are.
- spookthesunset 5y ago
  People are less likely to go places if they have to wear a mask. Eg: concerts, conventions, shopping, etc.
tomcam 5y ago
Could someone explain the downvotes for this question?
northerdome 5y ago
Mask mandate for everyone who isn't the mayor. https://www.sfgate.com/bay-area-politics/article/London-Breed-San-Francisco-mask-mandate-COVID-19-16472998.php https://www.sfgate.com/bay-area-politics/article/London-Bree...

dv_dt 5y ago

Yes my so cal county brought back indoor mask mandates. Btw according to recent press releases CA is the state with the lowest new case rate also. I don’t think it’s hampering the recovery, people are going into work, shopping and eating out more than a few months ago as far as I can tell.

ZetaZero 5y ago

EDIT: you guys cant take a joke

standardUser 5y ago
My only point of comparison is NY, where we've had virtually no restrictions for many months. Hence my curiosity.
spookthesunset 5y ago
Ah yes… the circular, self-referential argument for all these restrictions. Cases down? Keep the restrictions, they clearly are working! Cases up? Keep the restrictions, we still need them! And the cycle continues forever. Nowhere does anybody actually ask “do the restrictions actually work?”. The answer seems to be “not really”. Compare data and see for yourself: https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/ https://www.covidchartsquiz.com/

tunesmith 5y ago

According to one API I follow, SF county's Rt is slightly below 1, which means its case count is halving fairly slowly... and its cases/100k is still slightly above 10, which is CDC's benchmark for prevalence. They're probably on the verge of being able to relax some mitigation measures, but those mitigation measures are what keeps those numbers low, so that requires a big degree of caution. I definitely wouldn't say they are being too conservative with it, they're just on the verge of being able to relax a smidge.

spookthesunset 5y ago
> They're probably on the verge of being able to relax some mitigation measures, but those mitigation measures are what keeps those numbers low, so that requires a big degree of caution. This circular logic makes me tear my hair out. "Cases down? Lockdowns are working! Can't stop now" "Cases up? We need to keep these lockdowns!". There is zero exit criteria in this logic, which is why we are trapped in this vicious cycle of unending restrictions. It's the exact same argument as "Is it raining? Yes? It means rain dances work! Better keep doing them!" and "It is raining? No? It means we haven't done enough rain dances!" And all these restrictions might as well be rain dances at this point. It is just shit people threw against the wall in some panic'd attempt to "do something". Nobody seems to care if any of it works and asking questions is met with vicious attack.
- tunesmith 5y ago
  There's nothing circular about that. If Rt is above 1, mitigation will need to happen somehow - whether through natural immunity, death, vaccination, masks, distancing, whatever - until Rt goes below 1. If Rt is below 1, mitigation measures can be relaxed up to the point where Rt goes above 1 again. I personally look at four metrics - ICU capacity above/below 85%, test positive ratio above/below 5%, Rt above/below 1, and Case prevalence above/below 10/100k. If all four are below, then I'm hosting parties with my vaccinated friends. Otherwise, I'm trying not to contribute to spread.
- somethoughts 5y ago
  I think "the rain dances cause rain circular logic" would be true if (and a big if) it weren't for other states trying different, less strict strategies. Clearly some states are explicitly not rain dancing and are facing headwinds. And that's the beauty of state and to some extent even more locally based strategies versus national mandates. As long as there is a national agreed upon mechanism for measurement - its actually quite great that some states are willing to be guinea pigs and their citizenry are willing to go with different riskier strategies and experiments. In fact the steadfastness and persistence of some states sticking to their strategies even in the face of significant headwinds is a plus as it creates an even richer dataset for research and analysis. The headwinds these states are facing provides assurance to those in states with the stricter mandates that the mandates aren't just a pure power grab and government control and actually do have a benefit that is measurable.

conk 5y ago

How does a mask mandate impact economic recovery?

standardUser 5y ago
That is an example of a restriction that surprised me, so I am asking if there are also other restrictions that might be impeding the recovery, and how widespread they are.
spookthesunset 5y ago
People are less likely to go places if they have to wear a mask. Eg: concerts, conventions, shopping, etc.

tomcam 5y ago

Could someone explain the downvotes for this question?

northerdome 5y ago

Mask mandate for everyone who isn't the mayor. https://www.sfgate.com/bay-area-politics/article/London-Breed-San-Francisco-mask-mandate-COVID-19-16472998.php https://www.sfgate.com/bay-area-politics/article/London-Bree...