Dr. Cody says no fans in stands

Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands (/thread-20693.html)

Pages: 1 2

Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - teejers1 - 10-22-2020

The front page of today's Merc had an article that surprised me - somebody actually publicly questioning Dr. Cody's dictates. The article noted that Cody "promptly rejected" - within 1.5 hours - new state rules allowing some fans to attend outdoor sporting events. The article also noted that Santa Clara county led the lockdown in March but also "has been among the slowest to reopen despite moderate outbreaks that are among the lowest of the state's urban counties."

Supervisor Ellenberg said "For seven months, we have asked for extraordinary sacrifice from our local residents and businesses. I believe we owe them in exchange - at a minimum - transparency in the decision-making processes . . ."

Cody reportedly said the state rules came as "a surprise" but she defended her decision. "It's in my judgment not safe for our community, especially now when we still have so many businesses and so many activities that have not been able to resume. We're staring down what could be a really rugged winter."

Just smh at these initial "justifications." The fact that other businesses and activities have "not been able to resume" is solely dictated by . . . Dr. Cody. Apart from that, shouldn't the inquiry be the safety of the particular activity under re-opening consideration? What other businesses are or are not doing is a non-sequitur.  And "could be in for a rough winter?" C'mon now.

In fairness, Dr. Cody later said that just on percentages, if you allow 13,000 fans in the stands, then a couple hundred of them would likely be infected. And large gatherings invite too great a risk of spread.  Okay, then work with the stadium folks to see if steps can be taken to mitigate risk to "acceptable levels." And apparently, there has been dialogue between 'Niners and county. But it sure appears the answer is just "no." As another county bureaucrat, Jeff Smith, said "The virus spreads rapidly in large crowds and the virus is deadly. There is no way that 'talk' will change those facts." Thanks for coming; drive home safely!

In truth, I could give a rip about fans in stands at Levi's. But I do think this article is indicative of Dr. Cody's approach to dealing with the virus, which is "lock it down and come back to me when there's a widely available vaccine." They should be working their asses off every single day to work with every business, school district, parks, etc. to see what can be done to get things closer to normal. I just think she is completely opposed to any of that - and I don't attribute it to laziness (though some might). It's fear; it's imperiousness; it's a desire when all this is done to be able to brag "we had best numbers of any big county;" . . . or something. The ROW is moving forward - or trying to. But Cody isn't; or if she does, it's only "kicking and screaming."

Again, I wonder if she even looks at the hospitalization/capacity numbers. She certainly doesn't give much meaning to them (while others - or at least one other person! - believes it's the most important number for driving policy).

P.S. The article also buttresses my acknowledged belief that everyone's "outlook" on the virus is set by personal priorities. The Supervisor complaining about knee-jerk "no" from Cody & Co. is one who has Levi's in her district. Also, the Merc probably wants to support the 'Niners as much as possible (while not giving a $hit about, for example, public schools). Thus, they're more amenable to printing stuff questioning decisions when it comes to the 'Niners than when it comes to public education. [Okay, this last one is just my cynical take on the state of MSM].

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - OutsiderFan - 10-22-2020

I read something that said the 49ers aren't being ruled out of having fans. They have to submit a plan and if it passes muster they can have some fans. Is this not the case?

lex24 - lex24 - 10-22-2020

Could care less about whether the Niners get fans. Personally I agree that mass events like this is probably not smart. But I don’t think Cody should be able to make this decision

RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 10-22-2020

(10-22-2020, 05:33 PM)lex24 Wrote: Could care less about whether the Niners get fans. Personally I agree that mass events like this is probably not smart. But I don’t think Cody should be able to make this decision

As noted, I could not care less about fans in stands for 'Niners games, either. But I'm trying to cling to a policy of "evaluate each proposal" and allow it if it's relatively safe (always assuming hospital capacity allows for loosening). And when I see massive stadiums - like the Philly game tonight - with fans scattered about in very small clusters and in very small numbers - it doesn't strike me as particularly dangerous at all. Now, that's not true when it comes to other stadia, particularly some of the college venues in SEC where it looked like there were WAY too many fans in too close proximity to each other. The point is, when it comes to stadia, there ought to be some metrics that are reasonable enough to allow attendance. But with Cody & Co. that seems not to be the case.

So my question to you is this: if Levi's had 10K fans spread out in the open-air stadium, would you really view that as an unacceptable risk?
Forget about, if you can, your own personal priorities (which can be hard to do, I admit).

lex24 - lex24 - 10-22-2020

(10-22-2020, 07:06 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(10-22-2020, 05:33 PM)lex24 Wrote: Could care less about whether the Niners get fans. Personally I agree that mass events like this is probably not smart. But I don’t think Cody should be able to make this decision
As noted, I could not care less about fans in stands for 'Niners games, either. But I'm trying to cling to a policy of "evaluate each proposal" and allow it if it's relatively safe (always assuming hospital capacity allows for loosening). And when I see massive stadiums - like the Philly game tonight - with fans scattered about in very small clusters and in very small numbers - it doesn't strike me as particularly dangerous at all. Now, that's not true when it comes to other stadia, particularly some of the college venues in SEC where it looked like there were WAY too many fans in too close proximity to each other. The point is, when it comes to stadia, there ought to be some metrics that are reasonable enough to allow attendance. But with Cody & Co. that seems not to be the case.

So my question to you is this: if Levi's had 10K fans spread out in the open-air stadium, would you really view that as an unacceptable risk?
Forget about, if you can, your own personal priorities (which can be hard to do, I admit).

I honestly don’t know, Teejers. I wouldn’t go personally. And, I’ve gone to weddings, movies, restaurants, done a whole bunch of things. Mass events would make me a little nervous. I don’t think it would be a super spreader risk if that’s what you’re asking. But hey you know protests involving millions of people over long periods of times aren’t super spreaders so I can’t see how a few people hanging out in the football game would be right?

I come from a different angle. And that is I really want this to be decided by elected officials with input from their health directors. Not from people like Dr. Cody who are not elected and as far as I can tell have damn near unlimited power at this time.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - OutsiderFan - 10-22-2020

South Korea defers all its decisions to its CDC and they have done a fantastic job with Covid pandemic. This includes the KBO, South Korea's professional baseball league.

I get the sentiment behind having elected officials make the decisions so they are accountable to the public. But that risks making citizen health an exercise in political decision-making and potentially self-preservation, not science-driven decisions to protect public health. The job of leaders is to get buy-in from the public. You do this by being honest and transparent with people.

From the beginning Gavin Newsom has really made a sincere effort to provide data and transparency to the public. Ditto SCC.

The reason you should care about the 49ers is because if they are able to present plans to get some people in the door, that could allow others to potentially do the same thing and get their own permissions. That would increase economic activity, which I think everyone wants to see.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - akiddoc - 10-22-2020

I don't think her decision is based on scientific fact or probability. Outdoor transmission is not zero, but it's a lot less than indoor transmission, and in fact is likely not going to result in hundreds of infections. Second of all, I don't think the majority of fans are from Santa Clara County. The impact on the county if there are 15,000 fans, of whom maybe 6,000 are from SCC, isn't going to be statistically significant. I don't see any logical basis for this stance.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - M T - 10-22-2020

Teejers has his opinion. The Santa Clara County Public Health Officer has the degree and experience, as well as the authority and responsibility, per California law.

When I see a subject of "Dr. Cody says no fans in stands", I know immediately who posted it.
If I had seen, "Santa Clara County prohibits a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people," I would not have known who posted.

When viewed as a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people, I would have hoped even Teejers would see that as an unacceptable risk. I surely do.
If it was a President Trump rally, what would people say?

There are 5 gates (I think). At 20% capacity, an average of 2,700 people will pass through each gate. If you line up 2700 people in a line, all 6' apart, and they walk at a "walking" pace, they will take just about an hour.

As I calculate it, if every household group had exactly two people, the stadium can be filled to at most 16.7% if you keep 6' between groups (and they have to be offset on alternate rows). With larger household groups, you can pack more densely. (22.2" seat width; 36" row to row (not between rows, but row to row). 30" aisles)

Somehow, I don't think the 49ers will check driver's licenses to confirm that 4 guys in 49er regalia are all from the same address.
The state's 120 mile sales limit is pure showmanship. I bet there would be plenty of people selling tickets on Craigslist or in the area, without seeing if the purchaser lives in the Bay Area.

The County Public Health Office posted:
"Audiences at professional sporting events will not be allowed anytime soon in Santa Clara County, and theme parks will not resume operation. We must all continue to prioritize reducing the spread of COVID-19, creating conditions that will allow our businesses, schools, and other organizations to operate safely. As we see COVID-19 rates rising in states across the U.S., and as we enter the winter months when risks will increase, we cannot take chances with the health and wellbeing of our community and forfeit the many sacrifices that have been made to slow the spread of COVID-19."

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - Farm93 - 10-23-2020

(10-22-2020, 10:36 PM)M T Wrote: Teejers has his opinion. The Santa Clara County Public Health Officer has the degree and experience, as well as the authority and responsibility, per California law.

When I see a subject of "Dr. Cody says no fans in stands", I know immediately who posted it.
If I had seen, "Santa Clara County prohibits a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people," I would not have known who posted.

When viewed as a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people, I would have hoped even Teejers would see that as an unacceptable risk. I surely do.
If it was a President Trump rally, what would people say?

There are 5 gates (I think). At 20% capacity, an average of 2,700 people will pass through each gate. If you line up 2700 people in a line, all 6' apart, and they walk at a "walking" pace, they will take just about an hour.

As I calculate it, if every household group had exactly two people, the stadium can be filled to at most 16.7% if you keep 6' between groups (and they have to be offset on alternate rows). With larger household groups, you can pack more densely. (22.2" seat width; 36" row to row (not between rows, but row to row). 30" aisles)

Somehow, I don't think the 49ers will check driver's licenses to confirm that 4 guys in 49er regalia are all from the same address.
The state's 120 mile sales limit is pure showmanship. I bet there would be plenty of people selling tickets on Craigslist or in the area, without seeing if the purchaser lives in the Bay Area.

The County Public Health Office posted:
"Audiences at professional sporting events will not be allowed anytime soon in Santa Clara County, and theme parks will not resume operation. We must all continue to prioritize reducing the spread of COVID-19, creating conditions that will allow our businesses, schools, and other organizations to operate safely. As we see COVID-19 rates rising in states across the U.S., and as we enter the winter months when risks will increase, we cannot take chances with the health and wellbeing of our community and forfeit the many sacrifices that have been made to slow the spread of COVID-19."

MT - That was a noble effort to bring science and math into your response.

Anyone that has watched any game in AL, MS or FL in the last few weeks knows that getting and keeping fans apart is not practical. The fans tend to move to better seats. The fans tend to cluster near other fans to celebrate good events, often running all over the place to high-five others in the stands after TDs. And the pre and post game logistics and festivities almost certainly have people doing other things that COVID loves.

But thankfully for Dr. Cody there will be a better indicator of public opinion than a Stanford fan board.

On Nov 3rd if POTUS45 wins and the GOP picks up seats in CA government seats then it is possible that those in office might see that citizens want fun economic activities over COVID mitigation. We can have a fun little back and forth on this board about Dr. Cody, but on Nov 3rd Dr. Cody will likely get important feedback from the citizens of CA.

For me COVID-19 requires citizens to make choices if we want aspire to any level of control over the spread of COVID.

Fans in the stands or kids in the classroom?
I will take kids in the classroom.

To bring that back to The Farm -
Fans in stands or students on campus?
I will take students on campus before I demand fans in the stands.

If we can get students on campus and demonstrate that COVID is not spreading in the campus community THEN I would be happy to advocate for fans in the stands. I love Stanford athletics, but I believe Zoom Stanford has been terrible for students. So I will happily prioritize everything possible for Stanford students over Stanford athletics.

FWIW - When we get to winter and spring sports the same logic should apply.
No students on campus and in classes? Then no fans in the stands.

Quite possible IMHO that Dr. Cody permits some fans in the stands and the Stanford AD still opts to keep fans out.
That happened with the LV Raiders, for example.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - teejers1 - 10-23-2020

(10-23-2020, 06:25 AM)Farm93 Wrote:
(10-22-2020, 10:36 PM)M T Wrote: Teejers has his opinion. The Santa Clara County Public Health Officer has the degree and experience, as well as the authority and responsibility, per California law.

When I see a subject of "Dr. Cody says no fans in stands", I know immediately who posted it.
If I had seen, "Santa Clara County prohibits a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people," I would not have known who posted.

When viewed as a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people, I would have hoped even Teejers would see that as an unacceptable risk. I surely do.
If it was a President Trump rally, what would people say?

There are 5 gates (I think). At 20% capacity, an average of 2,700 people will pass through each gate. If you line up 2700 people in a line, all 6' apart, and they walk at a "walking" pace, they will take just about an hour.

As I calculate it, if every household group had exactly two people, the stadium can be filled to at most 16.7% if you keep 6' between groups (and they have to be offset on alternate rows). With larger household groups, you can pack more densely. (22.2" seat width; 36" row to row (not between rows, but row to row). 30" aisles)

Somehow, I don't think the 49ers will check driver's licenses to confirm that 4 guys in 49er regalia are all from the same address.
The state's 120 mile sales limit is pure showmanship. I bet there would be plenty of people selling tickets on Craigslist or in the area, without seeing if the purchaser lives in the Bay Area.

The County Public Health Office posted:
"Audiences at professional sporting events will not be allowed anytime soon in Santa Clara County, and theme parks will not resume operation. We must all continue to prioritize reducing the spread of COVID-19, creating conditions that will allow our businesses, schools, and other organizations to operate safely. As we see COVID-19 rates rising in states across the U.S., and as we enter the winter months when risks will increase, we cannot take chances with the health and wellbeing of our community and forfeit the many sacrifices that have been made to slow the spread of COVID-19."
MT - That was a noble effort to bring science and math into your response.

Anyone that has watched any game in AL, MS or FL in the last few weeks knows that getting and keeping fans apart is not practical. The fans tend to move to better seats. The fans tend to cluster near other fans to celebrate good events, often running all over the place to high-five others in the stands after TDs. And the pre and post game logistics and festivities almost certainly have people doing other things that COVID loves.

But thankfully for Dr. Cody there will be a better indicator of public opinion than a Stanford fan board.

On Nov 3rd if POTUS45 wins and the GOP picks up seats in CA government seats then it is possible that those in office might see that citizens want fun economic activities over COVID mitigation. We can have a fun little back and forth on this board about Dr. Cody, but on Nov 3rd Dr. Cody will likely get important feedback from the citizens of CA.

For me COVID-19 requires citizens to make choices if we want aspire to any level of control over the spread of COVID.

Fans in the stands or kids in the classroom?
I will take kids in the classroom.

To bring that back to The Farm -
Fans in stands or students on campus?
I will take students on campus before I demand fans in the stands.

If we can get students on campus and demonstrate that COVID is not spreading in the campus community THEN I would be happy to advocate for fans in the stands. I love Stanford athletics, but I believe Zoom Stanford has been terrible for students. So I will happily prioritize everything possible for Stanford students over Stanford athletics.

FWIW - When we get to winter and spring sports the same logic should apply.
No students on campus and in classes? Then no fans in the stands.

Quite possible IMHO that Dr. Cody permits some fans in the stands and the Stanford AD still opts to keep fans out.
That happened with the LV Raiders, for example.

I would love to see the "science and math" comparing risk of spread with fans spread out outdoors at Levi's versus what I see at the Mountain View Costsco - indoors, btw, with people in much closer proximity . . . everywhere in the store - every week.

Your comment about CA politics made me laugh out loud - yeah, I'm sure the voting in the state will be a referendum on Dr. Cody's decisions in Santa Clara County.

The one thing I did agree with in your post was the comment about prioritizing the return of kids to schools. (BTW, will the CA elections be a referendum on the decision to keep public schools closed, too?)

You probably don't believe this, but I really do not care about fans in stands at Levi's. The point of the post was to comment on Cody & Company's knee jerk reaction against any kind of re-opening, numbers be damned. You comment on my lack of medical training - conceded many times previously. But unless akiddoc's handle is misleading, that really isn't important to you, either. And regardless, "science and math" provide the numbers, people - usually through elected officials - make policy.

P.S. You just can't help yourself with the Trump bombs, can you? (Or was that some other poster in another thread . . . can't keep track). And to answer your question: it's the same whether it would be Trump or Biden speaking at midfield at a "rally." If the folks there were sufficiently limited and spread out, then it would be okay. But I know you knew that . . .

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - Goose - 10-23-2020

It must be kept in mind that the reason the State grants such authority to the County Health Department is to prevent local politicians from ignoring real public health threats because their constituents don't want to deal with the reality. It used to be that people with TB got hauled away by the Sheriff all the time at the behest of County Health. Lots of those people really didn't want to go, and lots of County politicians would have backed them if they could have. Having people running around with active TB and doing nothing about it wasn't a good idea, but who wants aunt Fiona hauled off to a TB Hospital? There is a (very good) reason Dr. Cody has the authority she does.

That said, I think it is reasonable to demand an explanation as to the thinking that governs all regulations, such as no fans in the stands. The idea that large gatherings pose a risk is clear. Why certain risks are accepted and others are not bears scrutiny.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - fullmetal - 10-23-2020

We already know that ordinary fans in stands will result in a superspreader event -- look at that soccer game in Italy. Unless you can enforce mask + distancing in the stands plus distancing throughout the stadium (MT makes an excellent point regarding bottlenecks in foot traffic; restrooms and concessions as well), you're just asking for a repeat of the situation.

I think fans masked + silent and distant in the stadium might be okay, but this is reality, and if we can't even get the LV Raiders OL to wear masks and distance (because millions of dollars ride on their health), how can we assume that football fans will observe public health guidelines (possibly while inebriated).

Someone brought up mass protests -- the data continues to show that no superspreader events happened at protests. I'd be willing to bet the masks and amount of moving air were key factors. Fans in stands generally stay still and don't move around enough to dilute their exhalations a lot, I would guess.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - Farm93 - 10-23-2020

(10-23-2020, 01:11 PM)Goose Wrote: It must be kept in mind that the reason the State grants such authority to the County Health Department is to prevent local politicians from ignoring real public health threats because their constituents don't want to deal with the reality. It used to be that people with TB got hauled away by the Sheriff all the time at the behest of County Health. Lots of those people really didn't want to go, and lots of County politicians would have backed them if they could have. Having people running around with active TB and doing nothing about it wasn't a good idea, but who wants aunt Fiona hauled off to a TB Hospital? There is a (very good) reason Dr. Cody has the authority she does.

That said, I think it is reasonable to demand an explanation as to the thinking that governs all regulations, such as no fans in the stands. The idea that large gatherings pose a risk is clear. Why certain risks are accepted and others are not bears scrutiny.

Goose, I agree with that logic.

Dr. Cody, or any health official, should need to explain their logic. Though it is hard here as COVID is still largely unknown to everyone. That means every decision is based on projections, models or guestimates. Still, an official should be expected/required to outline why they want to implement a path different than state and CDC guidelines might permit.

It is worth noting that at the state level we have been here before. In May/June Gavin Newsom was under pressure to open things up. Elon Musk, Disney, and others were all complaining that CA needed to be more like TX, FL and GA. Newsom relented and allowed counties to open things up more quickly, but the SF Bay Area counties were slower to open.

Literally weeks later the Southern California counties were seeing very troubling summer surges, the same trends observed in TX, FL and GA, while the SF Bay Area had it relatively easy. That was the summer when coronaviruses don't fare well. We are now moving into the fall/winter. Time to get serious..

Trump wins, Newsom will cave and Dr. Cody will have no cover. Trump will give us fans in the stands in the way he has given the BigTen their football.

Biden wins, Newsom has backing and will have revised statewide mandates at least as strict as Dr. Cody is currently advocating.

Chuckle I guess, but it really is that easy IMHO. The real key for CA policies is Newsom. Newsom seems to want to do more to fight COVID but is trying to avoid the wrath of POTUS45 given POTUS45 often threatens unrelated funds if he senses disloyalty (see CA fires).

That said, even with the current system we might get to Dr. Cody's approach soon enough since most of the state's biggest counties will turn purple if current trends in other states spreads to CA. The IHME projections suggest that in a few weeks Dr. Cody's stance won't be the constraint, the constraint will be the expanding COVID case rates turning the urban counties in CA to the purple status.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - Goose - 10-23-2020

(10-23-2020, 02:02 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Dr. Cody, or any health official, should need to explain their logic. Though it is hard here as COVID is still largely unknown to everyone. That means every decision is based on projections, models or guestimates. Still, an official should be expected/required to outline why they want to implement a path different than state and CDC guidelines might permit.

It is worth noting that at the state level we have been here before. In May/June Gavin Newsom was under pressure to open things up. Elon Musk, Disney, and others were all complaining that CA needed to be more like TX, FL and GA. Newsom relented and allowed counties to open things up more quickly, but the SF Bay Area counties were slower to open.

Literally weeks later the Southern California counties were seeing very troubling summer surges, the same trends observed in TX, FL and GA, while the SF Bay Area had it relatively easy. That was the summer when coronaviruses don't fare well. We are now moving into the fall/winter. Time to get serious..

Trump wins, Newsom will cave and Dr. Cody will have no cover. Trump will give us fans in the stands in the way he has given the BigTen their football.

Biden wins, Newsom has backing and will have revised statewide mandates at least as strict as Dr. Cody is currently advocating.

Chuckle I guess, but it really is that easy IMHO. The real key for CA policies is Newsom. Newsom seems to want to do more to fight COVID but is trying to avoid the wrath of POTUS45 given POTUS45 often threatens unrelated funds if he senses disloyalty (see CA fires).

That said, even with the current system we might get to Dr. Cody's approach soon enough since most of the state's biggest counties will turn purple if current trends in other states spreads to CA. The IHME projections suggest that in a few weeks Dr. Cody's stance won't be the constraint, the constraint will be the expanding COVID case rates turning the urban counties in CA to the purple status.

I am not so sure I agree that Newsom "wants" to be more strict but fears POTUS45. I think Newsom desperately wants to preserve the State's prosperity, because the programs he wants to deliver rely on having a good tax base. Like everybody else, he is caught between wanting a good economy and COVID-19 safety constraints. As you point out, there are many unknowns, and everybody is guessing to some extent. FWIW, I think Newsom responded more to Garcetti than to Trump last summer. LA wanted no part of what Northern California had done. They still don't

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - teejers1 - 10-23-2020

(10-23-2020, 02:02 PM)Farm93 Wrote:
(10-23-2020, 01:11 PM)Goose Wrote: It must be kept in mind that the reason the State grants such authority to the County Health Department is to prevent local politicians from ignoring real public health threats because their constituents don't want to deal with the reality. It used to be that people with TB got hauled away by the Sheriff all the time at the behest of County Health. Lots of those people really didn't want to go, and lots of County politicians would have backed them if they could have. Having people running around with active TB and doing nothing about it wasn't a good idea, but who wants aunt Fiona hauled off to a TB Hospital? There is a (very good) reason Dr. Cody has the authority she does.

That said, I think it is reasonable to demand an explanation as to the thinking that governs all regulations, such as no fans in the stands. The idea that large gatherings pose a risk is clear. Why certain risks are accepted and others are not bears scrutiny.
Goose, I agree with that logic.

Dr. Cody, or any health official, should need to explain their logic. Though it is hard here as COVID is still largely unknown to everyone. That means every decision is based on projections, models or guestimates. Still, an official should be expected/required to outline why they want to implement a path different than state and CDC guidelines might permit.

It is worth noting that at the state level we have been here before. In May/June Gavin Newsom was under pressure to open things up. Elon Musk, Disney, and others were all complaining that CA needed to be more like TX, FL and GA. Newsom relented and allowed counties to open things up more quickly, but the SF Bay Area counties were slower to open.

Literally weeks later the Southern California counties were seeing very troubling summer surges, the same trends observed in TX, FL and GA, while the SF Bay Area had it relatively easy. That was the summer when coronaviruses don't fare well. We are now moving into the fall/winter. Time to get serious..

Trump wins, Newsom will cave and Dr. Cody will have no cover. Trump will give us fans in the stands in the way he has given the BigTen their football.

Biden wins, Newsom has backing and will have revised statewide mandates at least as strict as Dr. Cody is currently advocating.

Chuckle I guess, but it really is that easy IMHO. The real key for CA policies is Newsom. Newsom seems to want to do more to fight COVID but is trying to avoid the wrath of POTUS45 given POTUS45 often threatens unrelated funds if he senses disloyalty (see CA fires).

That said, even with the current system we might get to Dr. Cody's approach soon enough since most of the state's biggest counties will turn purple if current trends in other states spreads to CA. The IHME projections suggest that in a few weeks Dr. Cody's stance won't be the constraint, the constraint will be the expanding COVID case rates turning the urban counties in CA to the purple status.

Okay, I will.

And I know everyone here wants to blame Trump for everything Covid-related and argue that he controls everything. But the truth is that Cody and Newsom have had WAY more impact on our day-to-day lives in SCC and California and they will continue to have way more of an impact after Biden is elected. And that's true in every other county and state in the nation. As it should be, btw, because each county's problems are unique - hell, intra-county things can be dramatically different.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - dabigv13 - 10-23-2020

I'm not sure why you're so worked up about Cody and Newsom; you live in a state and county that has kept this under control much better than most others. Would you rather have a generic R gov and public health officer? Not working well for the Dakotas right now which have the highest case rates in the world at the moment!

This was how North Dakota's leaders approached it-

Quote:The vast majority of North Dakota’s economy remained open through this crisis. Our success hinged on a low-mandate, high-compliance approach, and North Dakotans have done their part.

https://ndresponse.gov/covid-19-resources/covid-19-business-and-employer-resources/nd-smart-restart

This is what that looks like now-

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1319727737498550272?s=20
[/Tweet]

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - teejers1 - 10-23-2020

(10-23-2020, 03:42 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: I'm not sure why you're so worked up about Cody and Newsom; you live in a state and county that has kept this under control much better than most others. Would you rather have a generic R gov and public health officer? Not working well for the Dakotas right now which have the highest case rates in the world at the moment!

This was how North Dakota's leaders approached it-

Quote:The vast majority of North Dakota’s economy remained open through this crisis. Our success hinged on a low-mandate, high-compliance approach, and North Dakotans have done their part.

https://ndresponse.gov/covid-19-resources/covid-19-business-and-employer-resources/nd-smart-restart

This is what that looks like now-

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1319727737498550272?s=20
[/Tweet]

#OkayGenX . . . (or is that Y)?

https://www.health.nd.gov/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/north-dakota-coronavirus-cases

I'm sure North Dakota can be smarter - and I've never been an advocate of just proceeding as "normal." But the dashboard doesn't look that dire when it comes to capacity (though it may have been worse earlier in October). Also, I could be misreading death stats, but it looks like they include in 440 number those who died with Covid, even if not primary cause of death (78). But I could be misreading the board.

South Dakota hospital capacity board (noticeably higher % of Covid patients in hospitals there than in SCC), but still not bursting at seams:

https://doh.sd.gov/news/coronavirus.aspx

Interestingly, population of North and South Dakota just below population of SCC (iirc that SCC is just under 2M).

lex24 - lex24 - 10-24-2020

YY

(10-23-2020, 06:25 AM)Farm93 Wrote:
(10-22-2020, 10:36 PM)M T Wrote: Teejers has his opinion. The Santa Clara County Public Health Officer has the degree and experience, as well as the authority and responsibility, per California law.

When I see a subject of "Dr. Cody says no fans in stands", I know immediately who posted it.
If I had seen, "Santa Clara County prohibits a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people," I would not have known who posted.

When viewed as a mass gathering of 13,000+ yelling people, I would have hoped even Teejers would see that as an unacceptable risk. I surely do.
If it was a President Trump rally, what would people say?

There are 5 gates (I think). At 20% capacity, an average of 2,700 people will pass through each gate. If you line up 2700 people in a line, all 6' apart, and they walk at a "walking" pace, they will take just about an hour.

As I calculate it, if every household group had exactly two people, the stadium can be filled to at most 16.7% if you keep 6' between groups (and they have to be offset on alternate rows). With larger household groups, you can pack more densely. (22.2" seat width; 36" row to row (not between rows, but row to row). 30" aisles)

Somehow, I don't think the 49ers will check driver's licenses to confirm that 4 guys in 49er regalia are all from the same address.
The state's 120 mile sales limit is pure showmanship. I bet there would be plenty of people selling tickets on Craigslist or in the area, without seeing if the purchaser lives in the Bay Area.

The County Public Health Office posted:
"Audiences at professional sporting events will not be allowed anytime soon in Santa Clara County, and theme parks will not resume operation. We must all continue to prioritize reducing the spread of COVID-19, creating conditions that will allow our businesses, schools, and other organizations to operate safely. As we see COVID-19 rates rising in states across the U.S., and as we enter the winter months when risks will increase, we cannot take chances with the health and wellbeing of our community and forfeit the many sacrifices that have been made to slow the spread of COVID-19."
MT - That was a noble effort to bring science and math into your response.

Anyone that has watched any game in AL, MS or FL in the last few weeks knows that getting and keeping fans apart is not practical. The fans tend to move to better seats. The fans tend to cluster near other fans to celebrate good events, often running all over the place to high-five others in the stands after TDs. And the pre and post game logistics and festivities almost certainly have people doing other things that COVID loves.

But thankfully for Dr. Cody there will be a better indicator of public opinion than a Stanford fan board.

On Nov 3rd if POTUS45 wins and the GOP picks up seats in CA government seats then it is possible that those in office might see that citizens want fun economic activities over COVID mitigation. We can have a fun little back and forth on this board about Dr. Cody, but on Nov 3rd Dr. Cody will likely get important feedback from the citizens of CA.

For me COVID-19 requires citizens to make choices if we want aspire to any level of control over the spread of COVID.

Fans in the stands or kids in the classroom?
I will take kids in the classroom.

To bring that back to The Farm -
Fans in stands or students on campus?
I will take students on campus before I demand fans in the stands.

If we can get students on campus and demonstrate that COVID is not spreading in the campus community THEN I would be happy to advocate for fans in the stands. I love Stanford athletics, but I believe Zoom Stanford has been terrible for students. So I will happily prioritize everything possible for Stanford students over Stanford athletics.

FWIW - When we get to winter and spring sports the same logic should apply.
No students on campus and in classes? Then no fans in the stands.

Quite possible IMHO that Dr. Cody permits some fans in the stands and the Stanford AD still opts to keep fans out.
That happened with the LV Raiders, for example.

What happens in CA on Nov 3 will by no means be any indicator of people’s view on Covid and restrictions. There is almost no Republican party in California. The chance of them picking up seats is next to none. And it’ll be a cold day in hell before any of the constitutional offices are held by Republicans moving forward.

(10-23-2020, 01:34 PM)fullmetal Wrote: We already know that ordinary fans in stands will result in a superspreader event -- look at that soccer game in Italy. Unless you can enforce mask + distancing in the stands plus distancing throughout the stadium (MT makes an excellent point regarding bottlenecks in foot traffic; restrooms and concessions as well), you're just asking for a repeat of the situation.

I think fans masked + silent and distant in the stadium might be okay, but this is reality, and if we can't even get the LV Raiders OL to wear masks and distance (because millions of dollars ride on their health), how can we assume that football fans will observe public health guidelines (possibly while inebriated).

Someone brought up mass protests -- the data continues to show that no superspreader events happened at protests. I'd be willing to bet the masks and amount of moving air were key factors. Fans in stands generally stay still and don't move around enough to dilute their exhalations a lot, I would guess.

“Look at that soccer game in Italy”. This is what drives me nuts. There have been lots of sporting events with people in it over the last few months in various places in the world, including now in the United States. How many super spreader events have there been as a result?

You saw the same thing with school openings. Every time there was a school that had some problems it would be highlighted. And of course all of those schools that don’t have any problems simply get ignored. That is no way to make policy decisions.

I do agree completely, however, that none of these games should have fans unless and until schools are allowed to open.

I’m the one that brought up the protests. I don’t believe the “data” because it’s counterintuitive and completely illogical. And there is a strong political reason to assert that they did not contribute to the spread.

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - allrightynow - 10-24-2020

(10-23-2020, 05:51 PM)teejers1 Wrote: South Dakota hospital capacity board (noticeably higher % of Covid patients in hospitals there than in SCC), but still not bursting at seams:

South Dakota is not only leading the country in current Covid hospitalizations per capita at around 30 per 100k, I believe it would be one of the worst rates in the world if compared on a country basis (Czechia, in the news for a terrible outbreak, at around 30 also as of a few days ago). WSJ has a nice chart comparing per capita rates per state:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-latest-updates-10-23-2020-11603442326

RE: Dr. Cody says no fans in stands - teejers1 - 10-24-2020

(10-24-2020, 03:47 PM)allrightynow Wrote:
(10-23-2020, 05:51 PM)teejers1 Wrote: South Dakota hospital capacity board (noticeably higher % of Covid patients in hospitals there than in SCC), but still not bursting at seams:

South Dakota is not only leading the country in current Covid hospitalizations per capita at around 30 per 100k, I believe it would be one of the worst rates in the world if compared on a country basis (Czechia, in the news for a terrible outbreak, at around 30 also as of a few days ago). WSJ has a nice chart comparing per capita rates per state:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-latest-updates-10-23-2020-11603442326

Yes; and thankfully, it is not a populous state. Thus, hospital capacity, to date, has treated those in need (as far as we can tell). When I see those stats, I don't automatically assume "disaster." Not sure why anyone would, honestly. But that could change . . . just as it could anywhere.

P.S. Anyone else read the death reporting differently than I did (i.e., it includes those who died with Covid, even if not primary cause of death)? We had that discussion here earlier.