(11-15-2020, 12:26 AM)magnus Wrote: WA state to announce tomorrow new restrictions including no gyms, no bowling, no indoor dining, indoor gatherings restricted to households. (Just cherry picking)
With WA and OR tightening up, is CA following suit (or did I miss an announcement)?
California has had many of those restrictions in place for 2 or 3 months, but they are triggered on (primarily) the number of cases per capita in each county. Los Angeles has never officially gotten out from under the current highest restrictions (purple); Santa Clara County had cases drop to the level that indoor dining would have been allowed by the state, but the cases have gotten too high & things are locking up again
See
https://covid19.ca.gov/safer-economy/
I really don't like that it is "safer-economy" rather that "safer-people"! The whole set of SIP rules in California were all based around businesses. They never officially allowed people out to walk in their neighborhoods for health until the blueprint stuff came along (August?). You were allowed to go to a business for exercise indoors, before you were allowed to take a walk outdoors (except if you were walking to a business of course ). You were able to congregate for a business but never for non-business reason. I think I recall that initially, you were only able to go to a business to seek medical care or supplies or whatever. The rules about mask wearing were all business oriented -- for instance, if you were in a car for hire, there was a rule, but if you were in a car with a non-family member for a non-business reason, there was no rule. Ditto for residences -- all the rules defined that you had to wear a mask at a business or in a public place if within 6' indoors of non-household members, but didn't cover the case if you were in someone's house for non-business reasons (for instance, children being with the parent they don't live with).
Quote:Nov. 13: In Santa Clara County, Health Officer Dr. Sara Cody today announced that the County’s dramatically increasing case counts make clear that the County will be moved to the State’s Red Tier next Tuesday November 17th. Unless the current surge is quickly brought under control, the County expects to be moved to the Purple Tier in the next few weeks.
Dr. Cody and most of her colleagues around the Bay Area will be issuing local orders today requiring the closure of indoor dining and imposing limits on certain other high-risk activities. The new restrictions on activity in Santa Clara County will take effect on Tuesday, November 17th at 12:01 a.m.
(I don't know what happened to those orders. Neither the orders nor a press-release detailing them are at the SCC PHD web site in the wee hours of Nov. 15. They orders, as stated above, are not strictly necessary, as the state's orders will require those closures, starting Tuesday.)
As for purple status, the case rate (7 day average > 10 daily cases/1000K) is already at Purple status (> 7 daily cases/100K). The only reason SCC isn't purple is the hysteresis built into the rules. With things climbing this fast, I wish the county would get in front of it, not wait for the state's restrictions to kick in.
This site calculates an R of 1.4 for SCC and much of the area,
WHICH IS HIGHER THAN R CALCULATED FOR NORTH DAKOTA (1.33).
Edit: 1.41*1.41 = 1.988. This R suggests our cases will double every 10 days. So, by the 3 weeks happens when the state purple rules kick in, if R doesn't turn down, SCC will be at 20 new cases/10K per day.
Youch!
I would not be at all surprised to see the state kick in higher restrictions at 14 and 25 and 50 daily cases per 10K. and possibly 100 daily cases per 10K. I'm not sure what colors they'll have to assign them. The U.S. is currently at 43 new cases per 10K people
per the CDC.