Oops

https://data.chhs.ca.gov/dataset/california-covid-19-hospital-data-and-case-statistics

Oops

Data graphed from CA own website

Oops

Oops

Oops

https://www.newsmax.com/us/surgeon-general-adams-masks/2020/03/31/id/960679/

Oops

hanky1 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

What is the point of the lockdown if the curve is beyond flat? What is the scientific point?

There is no other conclusion to draw from the current lockdown other than either 1) officials are delaying to wait for the cure or 2) people are just ruled by their fear and making completely irrational decisions...not based on science but based on fear.

---

Where is the curve flat? How did you make that determination?

---

He doesn't know enough statistics and math to interpret a graph with a logarithmic scale.

---

Flattening the curve is all about ICU bed capacity. Lol. Try again. Here's the data. If you're too afraid to look because you'll have to admit that you're wrong, it's ok. I'll just summarize: ICU beds peaked at ~40% capacity in CA. 40%capacity!!!! It's now going down. Oops. This website aggregates data taken from each state's website.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/california

Edit: website is a few days behind. Look at CA own website and you'll see it's getting closer to 30% now.

---

All of your arguments seem to rest on hospital bed capacity. Do experts agree this is the most important metric?

I'm sure someone here will latch onto some tiny little detail about all of this to try to discredit, but fail to address the main point:

What is the scientific basis of a lockdown right now? Please go ahead and explain.

oops.

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

What is the point of the lockdown if the curve is beyond flat? What is the scientific point?

There is no other conclusion to draw from the current lockdown other than either 1) officials are delaying to wait for the cure or 2) people are just ruled by their fear and making completely irrational decisions...not based on science but based on fear.

---

Where is the curve flat? How did you make that determination?

---

He doesn't know enough statistics and math to interpret a graph with a logarithmic scale.

---

Flattening the curve is all about ICU bed capacity. Lol. Try again. Here's the data. If you're too afraid to look because you'll have to admit that you're wrong, it's ok. I'll just summarize: ICU beds peaked at ~40% capacity in CA. 40%capacity!!!! It's now going down. Oops. This website aggregates data taken from each state's website.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/california

Edit: website is a few days behind. Look at CA own website and you'll see it's getting closer to 30% now.

---

All of your arguments seem to rest on hospital bed capacity. Do experts agree this is the most important metric?

---

What was the point of the lockdown that started 2 months ago? I mean...what was the original reason.

Even Communist loving NYT is calling for reopening. The FACTS and LOGIC are simply irrefutable for even a rag like the NYT to deny

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/14/opinion/reopen-america-coronavirus-lockdown.html

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy - though benevolent King Newsom has the ability to grant variances under an unclear standard. OC - where there is virtually no COVID - hasn't been able to get a variance yet.

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

What is the point of the lockdown if the curve is beyond flat? What is the scientific point?

There is no other conclusion to draw from the current lockdown other than either 1) officials are delaying to wait for the cure or 2) people are just ruled by their fear and making completely irrational decisions...not based on science but based on fear.

---

Where is the curve flat? How did you make that determination?

---

He doesn't know enough statistics and math to interpret a graph with a logarithmic scale.

---

Flattening the curve is all about ICU bed capacity. Lol. Try again. Here's the data. If you're too afraid to look because you'll have to admit that you're wrong, it's ok. I'll just summarize: ICU beds peaked at ~40% capacity in CA. 40%capacity!!!! It's now going down. Oops. This website aggregates data taken from each state's website.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/california

Edit: website is a few days behind. Look at CA own website and you'll see it's getting closer to 30% now.

---

All of your arguments seem to rest on hospital bed capacity. Do experts agree this is the most important metric?

---

What was the point of the lockdown that started 2 months ago? I mean...what was the original reason.

---

That was the immediate emergency reason, yes. I don't think it's the only reason.

A lot of the scientific reports I read at the time were also concerned with a resurgence of the virus if social distancing were relaxed too early, so I'm thinking that's what is prompting caution now.

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

What is the point of the lockdown if the curve is beyond flat? What is the scientific point?

There is no other conclusion to draw from the current lockdown other than either 1) officials are delaying to wait for the cure or 2) people are just ruled by their fear and making completely irrational decisions...not based on science but based on fear.

---

Where is the curve flat? How did you make that determination?

---

He doesn't know enough statistics and math to interpret a graph with a logarithmic scale.

---

Flattening the curve is all about ICU bed capacity. Lol. Try again. Here's the data. If you're too afraid to look because you'll have to admit that you're wrong, it's ok. I'll just summarize: ICU beds peaked at ~40% capacity in CA. 40%capacity!!!! It's now going down. Oops. This website aggregates data taken from each state's website.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/california

Edit: website is a few days behind. Look at CA own website and you'll see it's getting closer to 30% now.

---

All of your arguments seem to rest on hospital bed capacity. Do experts agree this is the most important metric?

---

What was the point of the lockdown that started 2 months ago? I mean...what was the original reason.

---

That was the immediate emergency reason, yes. I don't think it's the only reason.

A lot of the scientific reports I read at the time were also concerned with a resurgence of the virus if social distancing were relaxed too early, so I'm thinking that's what is prompting caution now.

---

Literally the entire point we were sold on the lockdown was to prevent ICU beds from overcapacity and overwhelming the healthcare system. That is the entire point.

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

Hang on, doesn't Newsom argue there that Stage 2 is probably weeks away and Stage 3 months away? That doesn't tell me he's asking for lockdown until there's a cure. No one expects a cure to be developed that fast.

I'm not going to argue about the specific standards. I think some of those will probably need to be modified for higher-population counties, but then again I am not a public health expert so I am just guessing here. But the government is NOT arguing for "lockdown until there's a cure." That's a big exaggeration of their actual plan.

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

Hang on, doesn't Newsom argue there that Stage 2 is probably weeks away and Stage 3 months away? That doesn't tell me he's asking for lockdown until there's a cure. No one expects a cure to be developed that fast.

I'm not going to argue about the specific standards. I think some of those will probably need to be modified for higher-population counties, but then again I am not a public health expert so I am just guessing here. But the government is NOT arguing for "lockdown until there's a cure." That's a big exaggeration of their actual plan.

---

***?

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

hanky1 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

Hang on, doesn't Newsom argue there that Stage 2 is probably weeks away and Stage 3 months away? That doesn't tell me he's asking for lockdown until there's a cure. No one expects a cure to be developed that fast.

I'm not going to argue about the specific standards. I think some of those will probably need to be modified for higher-population counties, but then again I am not a public health expert so I am just guessing here. But the government is NOT arguing for "lockdown until there's a cure." That's a big exaggeration of their actual plan.

---

WT..F?

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

---

I mean...it's literally a direct quote.

Mayor: LA Will Never Completely Reopen 'Until We Have A Cure'

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

Hang on, doesn't Newsom argue there that Stage 2 is probably weeks away and Stage 3 months away? That doesn't tell me he's asking for lockdown until there's a cure. No one expects a cure to be developed that fast.

I'm not going to argue about the specific standards. I think some of those will probably need to be modified for higher-population counties, but then again I am not a public health expert so I am just guessing here. But the government is NOT arguing for "lockdown until there's a cure." That's a big exaggeration of their actual plan.

---

They're not arguing for lockdown until cure - just passing rules and regulations that require it. Objectively, what is your explanation for how such unreasonable rules requiring a cure were adopted?

And can't you understand why people: (i) take the regulations seriously; (ii) are pissed by such obvious overreach; and (iii) view the overreach as power/control hungry public officials gone mad?

Yes - Newsom is walking it back in part. Because of the budget deficit and public outcry. But that doesn't justify moving the goal post and forcing all of us to deal with the consequences of the overreach.

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

I could be wrong but I believe you are conflating issues. The current standard is that in order for a county to advance from early stage 2 (where the state is as a whole) to late stage 2 with relaxed standards if they meet certain criteria and can attest to that. See here for more details as to what the variance permits.

That is distinct from the statewide criteria that will be used to advance us to stage 3. Newsom has said that we are perhaps a month away from that, not many months or years, and certainly not until there is a vaccine or cure.

Like I said, I might be reading this wrong, but I believe the idea is that we are moving the whole state through the stages at a measured pace. Places that are doing significantly better can apply for a variance and move faster than the state as a whole, but that doesn't mean that we are going to require everyone to meet those criteria to move from stage 2 to stage 3.

If I'm missing something, I would appreciate someone correcting me and pointing me to documentation showing my mistake.

With the exception of Santa Clara, all of the bay area counties will be in stage 2 as of Monday, allowing retail and manufacturing to reopen, with modifications, should they choose to do so.

oops

hanky1 said:

---

oops

---

Stop it.

Somebody needs to stop this fight.

There's blood all over the floor of the octagon. The three of you are on top pummeling away at their face with no mercy as you giggle and smile at the crowd.

The SIP stooges are about to blackout but won't submit.

They need to tap out or somebody needs to end this and declare a TKO.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

I could be wrong but I believe you are conflating issues. The current standard is that in order for a county to advance from early stage 2 (where the state is as a whole) to late stage 2 with relaxed standards if they meet certain criteria and can attest to that. See here for more details as to what the variance permits.

That is distinct from the statewide criteria that will be used to advance us to stage 3. Newsom has said that we are perhaps a month away from that, not many months or years, and certainly not until there is a vaccine or cure.

Like I said, I might be reading this wrong, but I believe the idea is that we are moving the whole state through the stages at a measured pace. Places that are doing significantly better can apply for a variance and move faster than the state as a whole, but that doesn't mean that we are going to require everyone to meet those criteria to move from stage 2 to stage 3.

If I'm missing something, I would appreciate someone correcting me and pointing me to documentation showing my mistake.

With the exception of Santa Clara, all of the bay area counties will be in stage 2 as of Monday, allowing retail and manufacturing to reopen, with modifications, should they choose to do so.

---

I'm not conflating. The requirements are the requirements. And the requirements are impossible for a place like OC - with virtually no COVID - to meet.

"Some county supervisors despaired of ever meeting the benchmark of having no COVID-19 deaths in a 14-day period. In the past two weeks, 30 county residents have died of the disease, Quick said.

Orange County's public and private labs have the capacity to conduct far more than the 4,833 tests per day the state requires that's 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents but officials said with case counts and deaths staying fairly low, that many tests aren't needed right now.

We'd have to just be pulling the average person off the street and saying we're going to test you," Supervisor Lisa Bartlett said.

She questioned why Orange County, with its 3.2 million residents, would be held to the same standards as Alpine County, which census data estimated as having 1,129 residents in 2019.

These are requirements that the big counties are never going to meet," she said."

https://www.ocregister.com/2020/05/12/orange-county-meets-some-state-criteria-for-reopening-faster-falls-short-on-others-officials-say/

Variances are available though inexplicably OC hasn't been able to get one yet. Newsom and others politicians are playing games - enacting rules that are unreasonable and restrictive and then telling us they "might" grant variances and "expect" to be in stage 3 soon - if we all bend a knee and ask nicely. Why play that game? Why make a place like OC jump through a bunch of hoops and spend a bunch of money for no reason?

And to the larger point - the requirements have nothing to do with flattening the curve which was the basis upon which we all grudgingly accepted SIP.

BearGoggles said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

I could be wrong but I believe you are conflating issues. The current standard is that in order for a county to advance from early stage 2 (where the state is as a whole) to late stage 2 with relaxed standards if they meet certain criteria and can attest to that. See here for more details as to what the variance permits.

That is distinct from the statewide criteria that will be used to advance us to stage 3. Newsom has said that we are perhaps a month away from that, not many months or years, and certainly not until there is a vaccine or cure.

Like I said, I might be reading this wrong, but I believe the idea is that we are moving the whole state through the stages at a measured pace. Places that are doing significantly better can apply for a variance and move faster than the state as a whole, but that doesn't mean that we are going to require everyone to meet those criteria to move from stage 2 to stage 3.

If I'm missing something, I would appreciate someone correcting me and pointing me to documentation showing my mistake.

With the exception of Santa Clara, all of the bay area counties will be in stage 2 as of Monday, allowing retail and manufacturing to reopen, with modifications, should they choose to do so.

---

I'm not conflating. The requirements are the requirements. And the requirements are impossible for a place like OC - with virtually no COVID - to meet.

"Some county supervisors despaired of ever meeting the benchmark of having no COVID-19 deaths in a 14-day period. In the past two weeks, 30 county residents have died of the disease, Quick said.

Orange County's public and private labs have the capacity to conduct far more than the 4,833 tests per day the state requires that's 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents but officials said with case counts and deaths staying fairly low, that many tests aren't needed right now.

We'd have to just be pulling the average person off the street and saying we're going to test you," Supervisor Lisa Bartlett said.

She questioned why Orange County, with its 3.2 million residents, would be held to the same standards as Alpine County, which census data estimated as having 1,129 residents in 2019.

These are requirements that the big counties are never going to meet," she said."

https://www.ocregister.com/2020/05/12/orange-county-meets-some-state-criteria-for-reopening-faster-falls-short-on-others-officials-say/

Variances are available though inexplicably OC hasn't been able to get one yet. Newsom and others politicians are playing games - enacting rules that are unreasonable and restrictive and then telling us they "might" grant variances and "expect" to be in stage 3 soon - if we all bend a knee and ask nicely. Why play that game? Why make a place like OC jump through a bunch of hoops and spend a bunch of money for no reason?

And to the larger point - the requirements have nothing to do with flattening the curve which was the basis upon which we all grudgingly accepted SIP.

---

This is interesting but doesn't contradict what I said and seems to confirm that you are conflating the state's overall progress from stage 2 to stage 3 vs what it is currently requiring for individual counties that wish to move faster. My point was that the standards you described were for obtaining a variance to move through stage 2 faster.

You are correct that OC can't obtain a variance to move through faster because it doesn't meet those criteria. It's not "inexplicable", rather it is easily explained by reading the criteria which you listed. You may not agree with the criteria required to move faster for individual counties, but they are explicable - in fact, you explained them.

Again, please correct me if I'm wrong but you said "We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure" which I took to mean that you were saying that no county can move to stage 3 until that standard can be met. What it really means, is that it must be true to receive a variance from the current state-wide stage.

I think it's important to be not misleading in this discussion. Your post might lead one to believe that the state of California won't be able to move to stage 3 until there's a cure, but that's not even remotely true. Again, if you are saying something different, please correct me. Your last post appears to have moved to goalposts to discuss why you believe it's unfair that OC isn't eligible to move through stage 2 faster.

Just tap out bro

The goal post for the lockdown have clearly changed. Not even the main stream media peddles the "flattening the curve" narrative anymore.

Please someone explain to me otherwise...without resorting to semantical arguments. Literally that's all I've heard to justify the moving goalpost of the lockdown. Semantical nit nat.

hanky1 said:

---

I mean...it's literally a direct quote.

Mayor: LA Will Never Completely Reopen 'Until We Have A Cure'

---

So you see no space between "lockdown" and "completely reopen?"

GBear4Life said:

---

Just tap out bro

---

You always have to throw in one gratuitous kick at the end.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

I could be wrong but I believe you are conflating issues. The current standard is that in order for a county to advance from early stage 2 (where the state is as a whole) to late stage 2 with relaxed standards if they meet certain criteria and can attest to that. See here for more details as to what the variance permits.

That is distinct from the statewide criteria that will be used to advance us to stage 3. Newsom has said that we are perhaps a month away from that, not many months or years, and certainly not until there is a vaccine or cure.

Like I said, I might be reading this wrong, but I believe the idea is that we are moving the whole state through the stages at a measured pace. Places that are doing significantly better can apply for a variance and move faster than the state as a whole, but that doesn't mean that we are going to require everyone to meet those criteria to move from stage 2 to stage 3.

If I'm missing something, I would appreciate someone correcting me and pointing me to documentation showing my mistake.

With the exception of Santa Clara, all of the bay area counties will be in stage 2 as of Monday, allowing retail and manufacturing to reopen, with modifications, should they choose to do so.

---

Actually, thank you for laying this out. So the state plans to move out of full "lockdown" in stages, but basically within a month to be mostly out of lockdown except for the highest risk events (like sporting events with crowds). The criteria listed are for counties that want to move faster than the state's timeline.

Indeed, this hardly sounds like the state is planning to remain in lockdown until there's a cure.

BearGoggles said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

hanky1 said:

---

I don't understand why this is so difficult for people to follow. The narrative has changed and if you don't understand why people are furious then you have been asleep at the wheel. Let's review:

1. The CDC says 2 months ago that most of us will get COVID. It's on the CDCs own website and has been widely cited by scientist.
2. The lockdown was about "flattening the curve"...Preventing hospitals from getting overwhelmed which could lead to more deaths.
3. The lockdown WAS NOT about preventing the spread of COVID. It was about slowing it down to prevent hospitals from getting overwhelmed. The CDC's own website says most of us will get it...it is inevitable. Lockdown or not, it doesn't matter. Most of us are getting it.
4. It turns out that ICU beds never even came close to the capacity that was estimated EVEN WITH THE LOCKDOWN. Not even close. You can find this data yourself on the CA DOH website.
5. With the "flattening the curve" narrative now debunked, the story has now changed to "lockdown until we find the cure".
6. "Flattening the curve" has a definitive timeline. "Finding the cure" does not.
7. There is no telling how long it will take to find a cure. No telling how long you will be in house prison.
8. Reread #1 and #3 again.

---

Wait, who is arguing for lockdown until there is a cure? Which officials?

---

Here is the official County-by-County guidance for moving ahead in stage 2: https://covid19.ca.gov/roadmap-counties/ It requires:

• No more than 1 case per 10,000 people in the last 14 days
• No COVID-19 deaths in the past 14 days
• Minimum daily testing of 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents
• At least 15 contact tracers per 100,000 residents
• County or regional hospital capacity to accommodate a minimum surge of 35%

Read that again - to get to the later part of Stage 2, a county must have ZERO COVID DEATHS. Besides the fact that reports of deaths and cases trail by many weeks, we literally many never achieve that. Not absent a cure. And that is stage 2 - not the later stages. The standard is not just unreasonable - in many places it will be impossible.

Consistent with that, yesterday Mayor Eric Garcetti said LA would not "fully reopen" until there's a cure. He tried to walk it back, but he's referring to at least some restrictions (i.e, sporting events).

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/05/13/coronavirus-covid-los-angeles-la-county-mayor-health-reopen-vaccine/

According to Gov. Newsom, Stage 2 is "weeks" away, Stage 3 is likely "months" away and that Stage 4 won't arrive until "treatments for the coronavirus have been developed."

https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article242339301.html

So its not really a question of arguing for lockdown until there's a cure. It actually official policy.

---

I would agree that some of these metrics are probably unrealistic for certain locations.

However, this is still not "lockdown until there's a cure." Unless you only see the end of lockdown as the resumption of large group events like concerts and sports with crowds. I personally would say that once you're in Stage 2 or 3 you're not in lockdown.

---

We are currently in "early stage 2." We can't progress until we have no deaths for 14 days which, in any decent sized county, means a cure. Until then, no restaurants, no gyms, no haircuts/salons, no leisure/tourism travel, no shopping (other than curbside), and shockingly, no religious services, etc. And businesses operate with extreme limitations (i.e., partial staffing, etc.). No social gatherings.

That's not lock down?

SIP was justified by flattening the curve. The above requirements are far from that and in fact have little to do with flattening the curve. The goal posts were moved. It's really not close.

---

I could be wrong but I believe you are conflating issues. The current standard is that in order for a county to advance from early stage 2 (where the state is as a whole) to late stage 2 with relaxed standards if they meet certain criteria and can attest to that. See here for more details as to what the variance permits.

That is distinct from the statewide criteria that will be used to advance us to stage 3. Newsom has said that we are perhaps a month away from that, not many months or years, and certainly not until there is a vaccine or cure.

Like I said, I might be reading this wrong, but I believe the idea is that we are moving the whole state through the stages at a measured pace. Places that are doing significantly better can apply for a variance and move faster than the state as a whole, but that doesn't mean that we are going to require everyone to meet those criteria to move from stage 2 to stage 3.

If I'm missing something, I would appreciate someone correcting me and pointing me to documentation showing my mistake.

With the exception of Santa Clara, all of the bay area counties will be in stage 2 as of Monday, allowing retail and manufacturing to reopen, with modifications, should they choose to do so.

---

I'm not conflating. The requirements are the requirements. And the requirements are impossible for a place like OC - with virtually no COVID - to meet.

"Some county supervisors despaired of ever meeting the benchmark of having no COVID-19 deaths in a 14-day period. In the past two weeks, 30 county residents have died of the disease, Quick said.

Orange County's public and private labs have the capacity to conduct far more than the 4,833 tests per day the state requires that's 1.5 tests per 1,000 residents but officials said with case counts and deaths staying fairly low, that many tests aren't needed right now.

We'd have to just be pulling the average person off the street and saying we're going to test you," Supervisor Lisa Bartlett said.

She questioned why Orange County, with its 3.2 million residents, would be held to the same standards as Alpine County, which census data estimated as having 1,129 residents in 2019.

These are requirements that the big counties are never going to meet," she said."

https://www.ocregister.com/2020/05/12/orange-county-meets-some-state-criteria-for-reopening-faster-falls-short-on-others-officials-say/

Variances are available though inexplicably OC hasn't been able to get one yet. Newsom and others politicians are playing games - enacting rules that are unreasonable and restrictive and then telling us they "might" grant variances and "expect" to be in stage 3 soon - if we all bend a knee and ask nicely. Why play that game? Why make a place like OC jump through a bunch of hoops and spend a bunch of money for no reason?

And to the larger point - the requirements have nothing to do with flattening the curve which was the basis upon which we all grudgingly accepted SIP.

---

Orange County has nearly 4,000 active cases which is second highest in the state as of today, and had an additional 200 cases diagnosed just today. I would not classify that as 'virtually no covid'.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/california/

This guy is a hero. Freakin hero. Modern day William Wallace.

The curve is so flat, hospital workers are getting laid off. I mean....mass layoffs.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/coronavirus-victim-americas-largest-health-systems/story?id=70317683

oops

GBear4Life said:

---

Just tap out bro

---

They can't tap out bro.