12-14-2020, 07:27 PM
I've posted elsewhere but it the Santa Clara county directive did not come out of thin air.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working
Given that athletic contests involve traveling to other local authorities, it makes sense to restrict them. Ultimately the county has to draw up a list of activities that are allowed and those that should be restricted. It will by definition be somewhat arbitrary. And while we can all agree that healthcare and the provision of food (including grocery stores) are essential, it gets very murky very quickly after that
Even Scott Morrow (San Mateo County's health commissioner), who opposed the Bay Area's stay at home order, noted the silliness in exempting professional (let alone collegiate) sports from the state's restrictions.
https://www.smchealth.org/health-officer...-statement
[*]
I'm a fan just like you guys are, and while it is tempting to believe that the county health authority is being unreasonable and restrictive for no good reason, the truth is the exact opposite; the state and county are under immense pressure from business and financial interests that really don't want to close (and who can blame them), and unfortunately, this virus preys on wishywashyness, on the desire to get just a bit closer, to see one more person, to do one more activity, to get one more exception or exemption because what we want to do "is important and can be made mostly safe". But it is this temptation, which is almost entirely banal in the individual, but which cumulatively is leading to a worse situation than we had back in March.
With a Pfizer vaccine recently getting an EUA (and other right behind), we ought to be buckling down and doing our best to drive down infections for the next few months until the vaccine can be widely deployed, and that really does mean minimizing any non-essential activity, including travel for intercollegiate athletics. It is incredibly painful, but not as painful as it is for the relatives of the 300,000 people who have died from COVID-19 or the 110,000 people currently in the hospital with the disease. With the arrival of the vaccine, any transmission we can delay today, every person who can avoid getting the virus (not to mention giving it to someone else) is one person who may be able to be vaccinated before their next exposure and an entire chain of transmissions that can be blocked.
BC
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working
Quote:We found two ways that lockdowns suppress R. First, reducing trips to work helps, as do fewer outings to restaurants, bars and shops, though the effect of those leisure settings may vary a lot. (Usage of parks or public transport had no impact, perhaps because visitors are outside or wearing masks.) Second, lockdowns deter people from travelling to other local authorities. This is probably the most important factor in decreasing R overall.
Given that athletic contests involve traveling to other local authorities, it makes sense to restrict them. Ultimately the county has to draw up a list of activities that are allowed and those that should be restricted. It will by definition be somewhat arbitrary. And while we can all agree that healthcare and the provision of food (including grocery stores) are essential, it gets very murky very quickly after that
Even Scott Morrow (San Mateo County's health commissioner), who opposed the Bay Area's stay at home order, noted the silliness in exempting professional (let alone collegiate) sports from the state's restrictions.
https://www.smchealth.org/health-officer...-statement
[*]
Quote:That the State considers pro sports a critical infrastructure (essential) activity undermines this whole rubric in my mind. Pro sports is very nice to have and is probably a pleasant distraction. It is not essential. (Granted, I could be very wrong on this point. Maybe keeping millions of people home watching sports on TV without mixing households is exactly what we should do more of. Of course, if folks stay home watching TV and gather with other households, it could be much worse.)
I'm a fan just like you guys are, and while it is tempting to believe that the county health authority is being unreasonable and restrictive for no good reason, the truth is the exact opposite; the state and county are under immense pressure from business and financial interests that really don't want to close (and who can blame them), and unfortunately, this virus preys on wishywashyness, on the desire to get just a bit closer, to see one more person, to do one more activity, to get one more exception or exemption because what we want to do "is important and can be made mostly safe". But it is this temptation, which is almost entirely banal in the individual, but which cumulatively is leading to a worse situation than we had back in March.
With a Pfizer vaccine recently getting an EUA (and other right behind), we ought to be buckling down and doing our best to drive down infections for the next few months until the vaccine can be widely deployed, and that really does mean minimizing any non-essential activity, including travel for intercollegiate athletics. It is incredibly painful, but not as painful as it is for the relatives of the 300,000 people who have died from COVID-19 or the 110,000 people currently in the hospital with the disease. With the arrival of the vaccine, any transmission we can delay today, every person who can avoid getting the virus (not to mention giving it to someone else) is one person who may be able to be vaccinated before their next exposure and an entire chain of transmissions that can be blocked.
BC