Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - 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: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases (/thread-19683.html)
+- 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: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases (/thread-19683.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - BostonCard - 05-13-2020
You guys would like this:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/razer-to-make-face-masks-available-through-vending-machines?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=whatsnewnow&utm_medium=title
BC
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - OutsiderFan - 05-14-2020
I'm really getting tired of the "don't tread on me' bullshit from libertarians regarding mask wearing. Brakes in cars and stoplights are so lame. Why should we ever have to stop until we want to stop? Why can't I burn whatever I want in an open fire pit at my house?
What is it with these people? I mean I'm dead serious. Do they think every rule is a slippery slope to something horrible? From where I sit, the closing of businesses, stay at home orders, and mask wearing exhausts the inventory of available tools. Am I missing something? It's like the "Domino theory" to justify the Vietnam War debacle.
When you consider we've really only slowed growth and not stopped it, even with business closures and stay at home ordinances, you'd think mask wearing would be something everyone would embrace as a last resort, especially when these same people complaining about them are so eager to congregate with others again, the exact thing that spreads the virus like crazy.
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - g1313 - 05-14-2020
People naturally take the easiest thought path, and it's much easier to think "I don't want to be forced to do anything" than the complexity of weighing the tradeoffs of when it makes sense to have regulations. I think we are all susceptible to this to some extent. A good book to read if you really want to question whether you ever really make a good decision is Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
(05-14-2020, 08:27 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: I'm really getting tired of the "don't tread on me' bullshit from libertarians regarding mask wearing. Brakes in cars and stoplights are so lame. Why should we ever have to stop until we want to stop? Why can't I burn whatever I want in an open fire pit at my house?
What is it with these people? I mean I'm dead serious. Do they think every rule is a slippery slope to something horrible? From where I sit, the closing of businesses, stay at home orders, and mask wearing exhausts the inventory of available tools. Am I missing something? It's like the "Domino theory" to justify the Vietnam War debacle.
When you consider we've really only slowed growth and not stopped it, even with business closures and stay at home ordinances, you'd think mask wearing would be something everyone would embrace as a last resort, especially when these same people complaining about them are so eager to congregate with others again, the exact thing that spreads the virus like crazy.
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - burger - 05-14-2020
(05-14-2020, 10:04 AM)g1313 Wrote: People naturally take the easiest thought path, and it's much easier to think "I don't want to be forced to do anything" than the complexity of weighing the tradeoffs of when it makes sense to have regulations. I think we are all susceptible to this to some extent. A good book to read if you really want to question whether you ever really make a good decision is Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
This response overlooks this fairly strong relationship between political persuasion and adoption of social distancing, mask wearing, etc.: https://www.denverpost.com/2020/05/07/face-masks-political-statement-coronavirus/
This isn't a general human psychology problem. It's a political problem. Let's face it: one political party has spent years arguing that government is bad, the individual is paramount, and science should not be trusted. Resistance to simple practices that might save lives is just the natural outgrowth of this mindset.
It would be interesting to model how successfully social distancing, masks, etc. can reduce R when a certain fraction of the population refuses to change their behavior.
PS Thinking Fast and Slow is still a fantastic book, and I recommend it to everyone.
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - g1313 - 05-14-2020
I would argue that the political problem stems from human psychology - it's much easier to just base your decisions on what authority figures you respect / all your friends / the party you identify with believe, vs building your own first principles opinion.
(05-14-2020, 10:46 AM)burger Wrote:(05-14-2020, 10:04 AM)g1313 Wrote: People naturally take the easiest thought path, and it's much easier to think "I don't want to be forced to do anything" than the complexity of weighing the tradeoffs of when it makes sense to have regulations. I think we are all susceptible to this to some extent. A good book to read if you really want to question whether you ever really make a good decision is Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
This response overlooks this fairly strong relationship between political persuasion and adoption of social distancing, mask wearing, etc.: https://www.denverpost.com/2020/05/07/face-masks-political-statement-coronavirus/
This isn't a general human psychology problem. It's a political problem. Let's face it: one political party has spent years arguing that government is bad, the individual is paramount, and science should not be trusted. Resistance to simple practices that might save lives is just the natural outgrowth of this mindset.
It would be interesting to model how successfully social distancing, masks, etc. can reduce R when a certain fraction of the population refuses to change their behavior.
PS Thinking Fast and Slow is still a fantastic book, and I recommend it to everyone.
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - burger - 05-14-2020
(05-14-2020, 10:51 AM)g1313 Wrote: I would argue that the political problem stems from human psychology - it's much easier to just base your decisions on what authority figures you respect / all your friends / the party you identify with believe, vs building your own first principles opinion.
If you view right-wing opposition to masks, etc. as a failure of human psychology, then we're sunk because there's no changing that.
If you view this as a political problem, then we have levers--elections, public shaming of leaders, educational campaigns, etc. These may not be effective levers, but they're better than nothing.
RE: Santa Clara Today- 0 deaths, 7 new cases - BostonCard - 05-14-2020
A different interpretation has to do with trust.
https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/05/02/do-low-trust-societies-do-better-in-a-pandemic
Quote:Less obviously, these harsh lockdowns reflect widespread distrust. Even fewer French and Spanish than Italians think most people can be trusted: about 20%, similar to Poland. Some 25-30% trust the government, half as many as in Sweden. Some approve of tough rules because they mistrust fellow citizens. As a news kiosk owner in Madrid put it: “It’s a necessary evil. People here are all kisses and hugs, they eat paella from the same spoon.”
A somewhat counterintuitive thought is that left-wing support for masks and shelter in place is due to lack of trust in government and their fellow citizens. I don't think that is true, but it is probably worth examining these positions through a variety of lenses.
BC
RE: Leftcoast - M T - 05-14-2020
(05-12-2020, 08:46 PM)Leftcoast Wrote: “I don't know where Leftcoast saw 7 and 0.“
The SCC reported numbers were 7 and 0 and are in line with the general improvement Santa Clara has been seeing. New cases are higher today but not unusually so.
I missed the day they reported 7 for this past Sunday (reported Monday). I thought I had been looking every day. It was sandwiched between much higher numbers, and was the first day below 11 since early March. Certainly a worthwhile event to note.
Unfortunately, I don't know that there is anywhere that keeps the numbers of new cases as reported daily by SCC. The state has a record of case numbers for SCC that is different (perhaps collected at a different time of day). The County reports a history of these numbers grouped differently (by date of samples) and another history also grouped differently (by date test result recieved)
While writing this, I did find a source for the SCC new case numbers.
Beginning Saturday April 25, not quite 3 weeks ago, here are the numbers reported. You can see how much the different sources report different numbers for the same day, and how erratic the daily numbers are for SCC and the state. The sample date and positive test report data is smoother.
SCC new cases: sources: SC city archives, SC city COV19
(Apr 25) 22, 48, 23, 20, 25, 31, (May 1) 21, 26, 18, 13, 17, 19, 11, 19, 32, 7, 28, 21, 15 (May 13)
State:
(Apr 25) 19, 52, 7, 26, 17, 25, (May 1) 4, 27, 32, 3, 11, 21, 11, 4, 32, 14, 9, 22, 8 (May 13)
Sample date: [Last 5 days unfinished]
(Apr 25) 13, 11, 23, 23, 29, 10, (May 1) 23, 9, 9, 22, 14, 28, 12, 15, 6, 3, 5, 2, 0 (May 13)
Positive test: [Last 5 days unfinished]
(Apr 25) 23, 13, 17, 24, 21, 17, (May 1) 25, 22, 14, 14, 12, 11, 28, 16, 16, 7, 3, 6, 2 (May 13)