Newsom has repeatedly implored people to refrain from social gatherings and he expressed frustration that many aren’t following the guidance.There are several reasons why far more people than Californians should be concerned about this, not least because other states, including those with Republican governors, are considering similar actions, with Oregon now banning indoor gatherings of more than 10 people.“COVID-19 is not going away anytime soon, until there is a vaccine and or an effective therapy,” Newsom said. “Limit your mixing with people outside of your household. It’s just common sense, but the data suggests not everyone is practicing common sense.”
Newsom’s move faced immediate resistance from religious groups and business organizations. Fred Jones, attorney for the Professional Beauty Federation of California, suggested many hair salons may not comply with the order.
I've found disappointingly little intelligent or informed commentary on this development anywhere. For instance, while Gov Newsom blames the measures on people who are not practicing common sense, just from observation, few places have been more conscientious in maintaining all social distancing measures than churches. Everyone is required to wear a mask. Singing has been discontinued. Six feet of distance is maintained between all family units, with alternate rows of pews roped off and pew surfaces wiped down between masses.
But churches are among the groups now forced to close. Why should this be? Prohibiting singing goes along with all the other "social distancing" measures, which are meant to counter the "droplet" theory of contagion: the idea that the virus spreads by droplets emitted by people when they sneeze or cough. The experts say six feet is enough for the droplets not to reach other victims. Not singing prevents them from going farther than six feet. Wiping down the pews removes droplets that could be picked up by people in the next mass.
Beyond that, the churches take everyone's temperature at the door, so that those who are currently sick aren't allowed inside. If someone isn't sick, they aren't coughing or sneezing, so how can they transmit the droplets? So how are churches a big part of the problem? Diocesan reopening plans were approved in detail by health departments in just about every jurisdiction. Now, that doesn't apply -- churches are in the same class as bars.
This is part of the basic incoherence of the public health response, which only a few YouTubers have pointed out so far. And on top of that, BLM demonstrations continue to be allowed, when public health authorities have ben forced to acknowledge, very reluctantly, that they've contributed to the putative increase in "cases", which themselves aren't clearly explained. Test results aren't reported in a way that distinguishes between past infections with antibodies that indicate recovery, versus current active infection. But isn't that an important distinction to make, especially as testing increases?
The incoherence of the policies suggests this hasn't been clearly thought through. (Just for starters, Newsom said at noon Monday that the rollback was "immediate"; now its said to be effective as of tonight.)
I see a certain level of panic in Newsom's response, and the panic isn't from people getting sick. Why are "cases" increasing while deaths continue to trend downward? The suggestion seems to be that there'll be a delay from all the new infections, and it'll take weeks for those newly infected to die and start filling the mass graves in the public parks or something. We'll have to see, but such predictions have consistently not come to pass.
That this whole new rollback seems so hasty, so driven by some odd panic, and so clearly not thought through suggests it's not going to end well for the governors and the public 'health establishment.
