New wave of SIP

[magnus]

I'll blame the concept of "pods". While it may seem like a safe idea, I highly doubt that most pods are that isolated given what I've heard about them.  People are still going to the office from those pods, or going to the grocery store, or to their kid's soccer/baseball practice.  Plenty of non-pod interaction.  One person gets infected and BAM, the whole pod is at risk. =/

OK, ok, not the main reason for the explosion but I wouldn't be surprised if it was another layer of transmission.

[magnus]

NYC is closing in person public school instruction as they've exceeded their 3% positivity cutoff

[JustAnotherFan]

I'll blame the concept of "pods". While it may seem like a safe idea, I highly doubt that most pods are that isolated given what I've heard about them.  People are still going to the office from those pods, or going to the grocery store, or to their kid's soccer/baseball practice.  Plenty of non-pod interaction.  One person gets infected and BAM, the whole pod is at risk. =/

OK, ok, not the main reason for the explosion but I wouldn't be surprised if it was another layer of transmission.

I do not blame it on pods. The people I know who have established pods are taking the pandemic seriously and are militant about both setting boundaries with their pod mates and holding pod mates accountable. The people running around with masks hanging below the nose and dining in restaurants and just making quick runs to the department store to grab a nice outfit tend not to be the same people who have chosen a pod. Here's a great guide on how to responsibly establish a pod: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article...ndemic_pod.

[BostonCard]

The problem is that there is a lot of "pod infidelity" going on.  If my kids think they are in a pod, but their podmates are in non-overlapping pods, or their parents are in their own pod, you can see how it can quickly serve to infect other people.

The issue is that in terms of social interactions, it is really hard to have completely exclusive social groups.  Just not human nature.

BC

[magnus]

The problem is that there is a lot of "pod infidelity" going on.  If my kids think they are in a pod, but their podmates are in non-overlapping pods, or their parents are in their own pod, you can see how it can quickly serve to infect other people.

The issue is that in terms of social interactions, it is really hard to have completely exclusive social groups.  Just not human nature.

BC

This.

I apologize to those who are doing pods with strict boundaries.  These are not the people I have in mind.

[Goose]

There are families in my neighborhood that are members of several pods. What is not to like?

[teejers1]

The problem is that there is a lot of "pod infidelity" going on.  If my kids think they are in a pod, but their podmates are in non-overlapping pods, or their parents are in their own pod, you can see how it can quickly serve to infect other people.

The issue is that in terms of social interactions, it is really hard to have completely exclusive social groups.  Just not human nature.

BC

"Pod Infidelity" sounds like the name of a band . . . or a sitcom.

[oregontim]

The problem is that there is a lot of "pod infidelity" going on.  If my kids think they are in a pod, but their podmates are in non-overlapping pods, or their parents are in their own pod, you can see how it can quickly serve to infect other people.

The issue is that in terms of social interactions, it is really hard to have completely exclusive social groups.  Just not human nature.

BC

Agreed, pods are not perfect. This is another case where perfect is the enemy of good. Can we at least assume that pod consciousness tracks to some extent with general safety measures? Better than denial and 'who cares?'

[BostonCard]

It depends on what the alternative is.  If "pods" are viewed as a alternative to unrestricted interactions, then it is an improvement.  If "pods" are someone thinking that it is a way to socialize without risk as an alternative to not socializing outside of the household, then they are a net increase in risk.

BC

[BostonCard]

Now in California, Gavin Newsome announced a 10 pm to 5 am curfew.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...d-19-surge

BC

[JustAnotherFan]

Now in California, Gavin Newsome announced a 10 pm to 5 am curfew.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story...d-19-surge

BC

I hope there's a French Laundry exception.

---

The problem is that there is a lot of "pod infidelity" going on.  If my kids think they are in a pod, but their podmates are in non-overlapping pods, or their parents are in their own pod, you can see how it can quickly serve to infect other people.

The issue is that in terms of social interactions, it is really hard to have completely exclusive social groups.  Just not human nature.

BC

The article I shared talked about shared responsibility and informed consent. It's a really great doc. I guess I just hang out in leftist circles where everyone takes that very seriously.

[Goose]

I hope there's a French Laundry exception.

Not needed. He left before 2200. Also, it only applies to counties in the "purple" tier. We in San Mateo County can stay up later and party, at least for now. Seriously, I find this order to be a bit of a "nothing" burger. How much of our problem is happening after 10 PM and why do we think the people spreading the COVID-19 late at night are going to care about it? I guess I could be wrong, but I don't see it. If the curfew was 6 PM, I would give it some chance at helping, although all it may accomplish is driving people to shop earlier in the day and increase density thereby.

[dabigv13]

It does seem silly. But I guess it will raise awareness for folks that things are getting more serious.

[magnus]

It does seem silly. But I guess it will raise awareness for folks that things are getting more serious.

That's true.  Need for awareness is underrated.

[BostonCard]

The article I shared talked about shared responsibility and informed consent. It's a really great doc. I guess I just hang out in leftist circles where everyone takes that very seriously.

I would guess that most people's experiences with "pods" or "bubbles" are much closer to Manjoo's in this article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opini...ticleShare

To find some empirical foothold in a debate mired in uncertainty, I decided to investigate my own potential lethality to the older people in my life. Among other things, I contact-traced myself — an exercise that ended up being nearly as vulgar as it sounds. I went to all of my regular close contacts, then I went to all of their contacts, and so on, asking everyone about their potential exposure to the virus.

Nice graphic, by the way, showing the problem.

This is, exactly my problem. I had no contacts outside the house except for picking up food and sometimes going to my inlaws.  But my kids have contact outside the house, which is why we'll be having Thanksgiving outside with my in-laws at socially distanced tables if the weather is supportive... or we will drop the food off and have Thanksgiving over zoom.  It sucks, but it is simply not worth the risk.

BC

[Goose]

It is certainly important to protect the "vulnerable" people during this Thanksgiving holiday. Unfortunately, Grandma and Grandpa may be part of the problem by encouraging visits from children who live in other areas and have not been able to visit for a while. I see this happening with lots of my friends and relatives who have been real careful to this point. The "just this once" approach is in full swing it seems to me.

Another unfortunate thread in our own Bay Area is the idea that if you are not a "vulnerable" person, it doesn't much matter if you get COVID. That is true in so far as you will probably not die and will probably not have long term issues. However, at this point everybody who gets COVID is preserving the disease in the population, and as long as the disease is prevalent, somebody somewhere is going to get it and have bad consequences. We want the disease to  become less common, not more common. That is everybody's responsibility, not just those who are "at significant risk".

[magnus]

I would guess that most people's experiences with "pods" or "bubbles" are much closer to Manjoo's in this article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opini...ticleShare

To find some empirical foothold in a debate mired in uncertainty, I decided to investigate my own potential lethality to the older people in my life. Among other things, I contact-traced myself — an exercise that ended up being nearly as vulgar as it sounds. I went to all of my regular close contacts, then I went to all of their contacts, and so on, asking everyone about their potential exposure to the virus.

He has rationalized even with all the dangers that it is ok (after factoring in mitigating effects) for him to go see his elderly parents.  One can imagine how that is not sitting well in the comments.

[chrisk]

A fellow at Hoover is asking what exemption Stanford football will get for game tomorrow.

He suggests “homeless encampment”.

[JustAnotherFan]

A fellow at Hoover is asking what exemption Stanford football will get for game tomorrow.

He suggests “homeless encampment”.

Mind name dropping the person who contributed such trash?