Governor Newsom To Lift All Stay At Home Orders In Cali

[shufan1993]

Governor Newsom is now lifting all stay at home orders in California a few days after Joseph Robinette Biden was sworn in. Is this perfect timing? Why didn't Newsom make this announcement 2 weeks ago when Trump was president? Was the science that different two weeks ago? Or was there a major change in the science that has led for Newsom to make this announcement? Or is it just truly because Biden was sworn in? Just dropping these questions here. Looking forward to the discussion!

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/...wt_LABrand#click=[URL]https://t.co/qLSsvXUnjr

[/URL]

 

[shu09]

Gotta love science! lol

 

[Merge]

Gotta love science! lol

Yep, almost as much as I love trend analysis.

Stay at home order went into effect on 12/5/2020
Current Covid Hospitalizations had increased by 80% in the two weeks heading up to 12/5.

Covid Hospitalizations in the state peaked on 1/7/2021 and have decreased by 19% since that date.

Maybe their decisions are based on meting certain metrics?

 

[shufan1993]

Yep, almost as much as I love trend analysis.

Stay at home order went into effect on 12/5/2020
Current Covid Hospitalizations had increased by 80% in the two weeks heading up to 12/5.

Covid Hospitalizations in the state peaked on 1/7/2021 and have decreased by 19% since that date.

Maybe their decisions are based on meting certain metrics?

Does the time look a little suspect, though? Don't you think its alright to question the optics a little?

 

[Merge]

Does the time look a little suspect, though? Don't you think its alright to question the optics a little?

I have no issues with questioning anything. You should question everything. But along with questioning, you can do a little leg work to find the answers to your questions.

Hospitalizations are down, ICU usage is down and the 7-day avg positivity rate in the state just dropped below 10% for the first time since December 5th. Why didn't they make changes a week ago? Because the numbers were not as favorable as they are today.

 

[shufan1993]

I have no issues with questioning anything. You should question everything. But along with questioning, you can do a little leg work to find the answers to your questions.

Hospitalizations are down, ICU usage is down and the 7-day avg positivity rate in the state just dropped below 10% for the first time since December 5th. Why didn't they make changes a week ago? Because the numbers were not as favorable as they are today.

Were they projected to go below 10% a week ago? If so, why didn't governor make this announcement a couple weeks ago? He could have said the positivity rate is projected to be below 10% this week. Therefore the stay at home order would lifted this week.

 

[Merge]

Were they projected to go below 10% a week ago? If so, why didn't governor make this announcement a couple weeks ago? He could have said the positivity rate is projected to be below 10% this week. Therefore the stay at home order would lifted this week.

You're just hunting for a reason to make the decision to be about politics.

He opened up the Sacramento region two weeks ago and said there were signs of improvement in the state.

 

[shufan1993]

You're just hunting for a reason to make the decision to be about politics.

He opened up the Sacramento region two weeks ago and said there were signs of improvement in the state.

View embedded media

You didn't answer my question.

 

[Merge]

You didn't answer my question.

Because it is silly.
The state announced the metrics they would start to need to hit to open up months ago. They are starting to hit those metrics now. A projection from 2 weeks ago might be right or wrong. You hit the metrics when you hit them.

 

[ed odowd]

Could it possibly have anything to do with recall effort ?

 

[shufan1993]

Because it is silly.
The state announced the metrics they would start to need to hit to open up months ago. They are starting to hit those metrics now. A projection from 2 weeks ago might be right or wrong. You hit the metrics when you hit them.

Why was the Governor enjoying a nice dinner at a restaurant with 10 or so maskless people when the science told them not to?

 

[shufan1993]

Could it possibly have anything to do with recall effort ?

I believe it could Ed! But some other posters on this board still think the Governor is strictly following the "science". If so, why did governor Newsom have a dinner with maskless individuals when the science told him not too? Wasn't he not following his own order?

I still think there is still some politics involved with this.

 

[shu09]

Could it possibly have anything to do with recall effort ?

That's exactly what it's about.

 

[Merge]

Why was the Governor enjoying a nice dinner at a restaurant with 10 or so maskless people when the science told them not to?

Because he is a tone deaf jackass as I said here in another thread.
He should have been leading by example and absolutely deserves criticism on that.

 

[Merge]

That's exactly what it's about.

This is the 6th attempt to recall him. I doubt he is that concerned about that and a recall effort could catapult him into a becoming a more prominent politician kind of like how the attempt to recall Scott Walker pushed him into the 2016 presidential race.

 

[shufan1993]

Because he is a tone deaf jackass as I said here in another thread.
He should have been leading by example and absolutely deserves criticism on that.

If the governor is ignoring the science in this example, he is ignoring the science in other instances too. Especially when its in his political interest.

 

[ed odowd]

Cuomo and Newsome suddenly decide we have to open up days after Biden inauguration.Does anyone even rabid Dems really believe this is a coincidence?These guys should be impeached for playing politics with people’s lives and livelihood, but since they are in blue states pols will look the other way.

 

[shu09]

This is the 6th attempt to recall him. I doubt he is that concerned about that and a recall effort could catapult him into a becoming a more prominent politician kind of like how the attempt to recall Scott Walker pushed him into the 2016 presidential race.

This one actually has momentum behind it.

Or he goes the route of Gray Davis, the last CA governor recalled, and is never heard from again.

 

[shu09]

Cuomo and Newsome suddenly decide we have to open up days after Biden inauguration.Does anyone even rabid Dems really believe this is a coincidence?These guys should be impeached for playing politics with people’s lives and livelihood, but since they are in blue states pols will look the other way.

Whitmer and the mayors of DC (Bowser) and Chicago (Lightfoot) too. All loosened restrictions in recent days.

 

[Seton75]

We were all told the media woudl stop talking about covid it Biden was elected. They made it all up after all.

Someone tell that to the media I read and write.

 

[shufan1993]

Whitmer and the mayors of DC (Bowser) and Chicago (Lightfoot) too. All loosened restrictions in recent days.

Correct. And somehow some people on this board believe these mayor's/governors are strictly "following the science"

 

[Pirata]

Governor Newsom is now lifting all stay at home orders in California a few days after Joseph Robinette Biden was sworn in. Is this perfect timing? Why didn't Newsom make this announcement 2 weeks ago when Trump was president? Was the science that different two weeks ago? Or was there a major change in the science that has led for Newsom to make this announcement? Or is it just truly because Biden was sworn in? Just dropping these questions here. Looking forward to the discussion!

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/...wt_LABrand#click=[URL]https://t.co/qLSsvXUnjr

[/URL]

Ready.....fire!!...aim.

 

[Merge]

Whitmer and the mayors of DC (Bowser) and Chicago (Lightfoot) too. All loosened restrictions in recent days.

The current wave in the US peaked on January 6th and is on a downward trend.

How should politicians respond to the downward trend without you believing that it is political?

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

The current wave in the US peaked on January 6th and is on a downward trend.

How should politicians respond to the downward trend without you believing that it is political?

Trends are interesting. Yes percentages are going down but the total number still isn't low enough where I think science would suggest we are back where we are pre lockdowns. This is the ability to manipulate numbers in any which way to make a case. One can make the case the numbers in December were lower than they currently are now. Until the numbers actually get that low again why change the plan if you believe it is working? Everyone on both sides can take the numbers, create what they want out of them for political reasons. It's not science....it's politics.

 

[HALL85]

Trends are interesting. Yes percentages are going down but the total number still isn't low enough where I think science would suggest we are back where we are pre lockdowns. This is the ability to manipulate numbers in any which way to make a case. One can make the case the numbers in December were lower than they currently are now. Until the numbers actually get that low again why change the plan if you believe it is working? Everyone on both sides can take the numbers, create what they want out of them for political reasons. It's not science....it's politics.

Politicians don't follow the science...they follow the politics.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Politicians don't follow the science...they follow the politics.

Sure they'll freak out if we go from 5 new cases to 10 new cases. Then they'll tell you we have it under control as we go from 50,000 new cases to 49,500 new cases.

 

[Merge]

Trends are interesting. Yes percentages are going down but the total number still isn't low enough where I think science would suggest we are back where we are pre lockdowns.

To be fair though, no one has suggested going bac to a pre-lockdown state. They are just easing restrictions.

I've maintained that positivity rate is probably the most important metric to get an understanding of what is happening currently so when you start seeing declines in that rate and in the context that we are really just ramping up vaccine administration (that is not a credit to Biden, just a coincidence of timing) then I think the timing seems about right in regards to easing (not eliminating) restrictions.

Isn't that exactly what we should all be rooting for? That politicians start to ease restrictions when the data is showing that things are improving?

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

To be fair though, no one has suggested going bac to a pre-lockdown state. They are just easing restrictions.

I've maintained that positivity rate is probably the most important metric to get an understanding of what is happening currently so when you start seeing declines in that rate and in the context that we are really just ramping up vaccine administration (that is not a credit to Biden, just a coincidence of timing) then I think the timing seems about right in regards to easing (not eliminating) restrictions.

Isn't that exactly what we should all be rooting for? That politicians start to ease restrictions when the data is showing that things are improving?

Of course. But as I'm sure anyone on this board who works with numbers will tell you, you can manipulate the numbers to be anything you want.

 

[HALL85]

The number one objective throughout this pandemic has been to ensure our healthcare system was not overwhelmed. Even though every other metric has gone up in the second wave, the system has not been nearly as stressed as there were concerns in the spring. Elective surgeries have been full speed ahead since the fall, in fact, hospitals are running at about 90% of last year because there is a segment of the population still leery about scheduling procedures.

 

[shu09]

The current wave in the US peaked on January 6th and is on a downward trend.

How should politicians respond to the downward trend without you believing that it is political?

Should have never restricted anything in the first place. US has more cases per day now than when Newsom implemented the latest round.

 

[Merge]

Of course. But as I'm sure anyone on this board who works with numbers will tell you, you can manipulate the numbers to be anything you want.

Sure, you can massage the analysis to fit your narrative which is why you set you parameters before you actually look at the data.

I noticed the link between positivity rate changes leading to changes in hospitalizations and deaths early on. That has been fairly consistent across the board. I have said many times that a decrease in the positivity rate is the first sign that things are improving.

 

[Merge]

Should have never restricted anything in the first place.

Regardless of your view there though, the trends are improving. How should Newsom respond today?

US has more cases per day now than when Newsom implemented the latest round.

That is not correct in the US or in California.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

Sure, you can massage the analysis to fit your narrative which is why you set you parameters before you actually look at the data.

I noticed the link between positivity rate changes leading to changes in hospitalizations and deaths early on. That has been fairly consistent across the board. I have said many times that a decrease in the positivity rate is the first sign that things are improving.

Again you can play the numbers game 1,000 different ways. Newsom put the stay at home in order with a 7 day average of 17,000 cases per day. Currently the 7 day average is 25,000 cases per day. Those number don't factor in. Politics.

 

[Merge]

Again you can play the numbers game 1,000 different ways. Newsom put the stay at home in order with a 7 day average of 17,000 cases per day. Currently the 7 day average is 25,000 cases per day. Those number don't factor in. Politics.

To be clear here. I am talking about the data only, not a politician.

Keep in mind that the positivity rate peaked on January 1st and has been steadily declining since.
Assume you had to pick a moment to add restrictions and remove restrictions. Point to where that would be on this chart.

 

[shu09]

Just shows that virus gonna virus no matter what we do. The spring surge in the northeast showed the same. A steep rise and then a fall 6-8 weeks later. Same with the sun belt summer surge. Same with the fall/winter surge.

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

To be clear here. I am talking about the data only, not a politician.

Keep in mind that the positivity rate peaked on January 1st and has been steadily declining since.
Assume you had to pick a moment to add restrictions and remove restrictions. Point to where that would be on this chart.

I get it, but we’re literally saying 17k is a concern because the curve is going up but 25k is ok because the curve is going down. Literally 8,000 people more per week are still getting the virus and we can justify relaxing what we believe is slowing the spread. Number manipulation.
and to answer your question, I would pick the same number on both sides. That would be my way of justifying the data. I wouldn’t change every time the curve changes.

 

[Merge]

I get it, but we’re literally saying 17k is a concern because the curve is going up but 25k is ok because the curve is going down. Literally 8,000 people more per week are still getting the virus and we can justify relaxing what we believe is slowing the spread. Number manipulation.

and to answer your question, it would be 20k on both sides.

The trend line when it was 17k, increasing rapidly and the positivity rate was high, it means there are a lot more cases coming. When it is 25k on a downward trend with a decreasing positivity rate it means the spread has slowed.

20k on both sides is +/- about 1-2 days of what Newsom actually did.

I think that is the thing I am getting at here. Whatever the take on shutting down or not, or what politics were involved in that decision, I think the data supports restrictions on the upward trend and easing them on the downward trend. Maybe he got it right?

 

[SHUHoopsFan]

The trend line when it was 17k, increasing rapidly and the positivity rate was high, it means there are a lot more cases coming. When it is 25k on a downward trend with a decreasing positivity rate it means the spread has slowed.

20k on both sides is +/- about 1-2 days of what Newsom actually did.

I think that is the thing I am getting at here. Whatever the take on shutting down or not, or what politics were involved in that decision, I think the data supports restrictions on the upward trend and easing them on the downward trend. Maybe he got it right?

Can you provide the chart on Covid deaths in California?

He got it right if you care more about trends than total number.

 

[Hallsome]

I have no issues with questioning anything. You should question everything. But along with questioning, you can do a little leg work to find the answers to your questions.

Hospitalizations are down, ICU usage is down and the 7-day avg positivity rate in the state just dropped below 10% for the first time since December 5th. Why didn't they make changes a week ago? Because the numbers were not as favorable as they are today.

Dark winter

 

[Merge]

Can you provide the chart on Covid deaths in California?

He got it right if you care more about trends than total number.

Sure. I'll include case increase as well so you can see the lag between case increases leading to the increase in deaths