Kaworu said:
OaktownBear said:
LMK5 said:
LA County reporting just 3.1% of cases traced to restaurants and bars: https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/la-county-covid-stats-reveal-3-1-of-cases-traced-to-restaurants-bars
That article is a complete an utter lie. It totally misrepresents the data in the database. The data in no way indicates that 3.1% of cases are traced to restaurants, whether that number is high or low.
Out of 364,000 + cases, they have traced 2257 cases to specific businesses. It only includes businesses that have had 3 or more cases. Only 8 of those are identified as non staff which indicates how much they are tracing. They do not know if those businesses are even where the people got the disease. The reporter just tallied what they think are restaurants. That is not a scientific sample nor was it supposed to be. That is a bullshyte reporter trying to read a chart to make a political point. LA county did not report that 3.1% are traced to restaurants. No scientist made that claim. There was no study. It was simply reporting businesses that they know of that had 3 or more cases. It was not a systematic tracing or look in any way at how the disease spreads.
Complete and utter bullshyte reporting. We need reporting that actually follows facts, not bullshyte like this.
Yeah but the part you're leaving out is that the evidence that the people who have been catching it are catching it in restaurants is completely theoretical at best. They have no more idea where people are catching it.
That CDC study above based on cell phone data has zero contact tracing.
1. China did contact tracing at the beginning of this that specifically showed spreading events at restaurants
2. There is nothing wrong with using cell phone data to determine probability. It is not as good as specific tracing, but it is persuasive. There is nothing wrong with using prevalent behaviors of people who have the disease to determine probabilities. Those are not theoretical, they are circumstantial. Acting like it is of no value is not scientifically valid. You are requiring that only tracing is valid which is not true and in most cases they can't trace to that point. And, by the way, gravity is theoretical. The earth being round was theoretical until we could literally go into space and see it. Much of science is theoretical and is proven to the nth degree. There is nothing wrong with theory based on the best evidence available.
3 It is clear that being indoors in a closed environment for a prolonged period of time without masks with talking, yelling, or singing poses a significant risk of spread. So fine. We don't close down indoor dining. We close down all indoor activity that has people in a closed environment for a prolonged period of time without masks talking.
4. You want scientific studies that are infeasible. You want them to get granular on every single activity which is not possible. What you are doing is like saying proving sugar is bad for you is not enough. I need a double blind study to prove Coke is bad, root beer is bad, candy bars are bad, twinkies are bad, etc. We are nine months in. We can't study whether riding motor scooters naked at midnight helps spread the virus. We know very well how the virus is transmitting. Restaurants provide exactly that environment. The level of study you are requiring essentially makes it impossible to have any reasonable response. There is not going to be video of the virus flowing from diner to diner to make you happy. The level of proof we have clearly meets the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. With the standard you are trying to apply, maybe in 10 years science can go back and prove to you that in fact the thousands of people that died because we didn't do anything did, in fact, die because we didn't do anything.
