Photographer
Red Sky Photography
Posts: 3898
Germantown, Maryland, US
LightDreams wrote:
Out of curiosity, I don't know the details but I know you have some kind of medicare system for seniors. How well does it run / how (reasonably) complete / protected are the seniors under that program? Is it similar to the VA mess? or is not very useful in terms of coverage, or...? When I was working, I paid $400 a month as my share of my employer's Health Car Plan with Kaiser.
After I had to retire and go on Medicare, I pay $ 130 a month that comes out of my Social Security automatically. Additionally I pay Kaiser $39 a month for a Medicare Advantage Plan, automatically from my Social Security.
So now the same coverage costs me $169 a month as opposed to the $400 I was previously paying. I don't know how much my employer was contributing.
All my Doctors, Lab and Pharmacy are in one building 2 miles from my home.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
101,698 dead in the US as of this morning.
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
rfordphotos wrote:
We landed on the freaking moon for crying out loud, we should be able to figure out how to care for one another. America is now the country that can't figure out how to get cotton swabs to hospitals and permits a lying clown to remain in the White House, with a high likelihood of re-election.
Photographer
JQuest
Posts: 2460
Syracuse, New York, US
Shadow Dancer wrote:
101,698 dead in the US as of this morning. Just for context, you should probably add, that's all in four months.
Clothing Designer
Baanthai
Posts: 1218
Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand
Shadow Dancer wrote:
101,698 dead in the US as of this morning. JQuest wrote:
Just for context, you should probably add, that's all in four months. Just for context, 101,698 is probably a significant undercount.
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
Red Sky Photography wrote:
When I was working, I paid $400 a month as my share of my employer's Health Car Plan with Kaiser.
After I had to retire and go on Medicare, I pay $ 130 a month that comes out of my Social Security automatically. Additionally I pay Kaiser $39 a month for a Medicare Advantage Plan, automatically from my Social Security.
So now the same coverage costs me $169 a month as opposed to the $400 I was previously paying. I don't know how much my employer was contributing.
All my Doctors, Lab and Pharmacy are in one building 2 miles from my home. Medicare is the most popular government program after social security, both socialistic. Even die-hard government haters carry signs that read "Hands off my Medicare." Medicare is the ideal template for universal healthcare at this time - basic coverage for everyone, with carve-outs for private insurance to fill in gaps or extend benefits for those who want to pay for it.
It is such an obvious solution, but the system that coughed up a Donald Trump is incapable of doing it.
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
rfordphotos wrote:
Sorry.
You are absolutely correct I did not intend to use a prejudicial word. My intent was to describe a health care system completely administered by the government with no private sector involved.
I am hopelessly disconnected to a lot of the buzzwords, I dont use social media where so many of these terms take on their current cultural meanings... is "single payer" better (or worse?) What would be a good, non-politicized term to use?
Medicare? Your private doctor bills the govt for his services. Anything not paid is your responsibility. Doctors and the govt often do not agree on the value of services... As a VA patient, I am not using Medicare but I remember what it was like during my Dad's illness trying to keep the doctors happy and paid.
Medicare helps. But we still have waaaaay to many seniors trying to decide whether to buy their meds or food. Do not run away from the term "socialized medicine." It IS socialized medicine, despite the decades-long rightwing propaganda campaign of demonization. Don't let the knuckle draggers win. Wingers proudly state they are "conservative" while "liberal" is a dirty word. We let this happen. I remember when Barry Goldwater had to defend "conservatism" and scorned "moderation". How times have changed.
Photographer
LightDreams
Posts: 4458
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Focuspuller wrote:
Do not run away from the term "socialized medicine." It IS socialized medicine, despite the decades-long rightwing propaganda campaign of demonization. Don't let the knuckle draggers win. Wingers proudly state they are "conservative" while "liberal" is a dirty word. We let this happen. I remember when Barry Goldwater had to defend "conservatism" and scorned "moderation". How times have changed. While I understand your principles, and your intent, in terms of whether people support a major change or not, the wording really DOES matter.
I remember back when Obamacare was being proposed and it was being demonized by some politicians. A survey asked Americans what they thought of it when it was referred to as "Obamacare" and the basics of the plan were outlined to them. At the time, the majority of Americans disapproved of it. BUT when they reran the exact same survey in the same way, but referred to it as "the Affordable Health Care Act", the majority of Americans strongly approved of it.
So political wording / demonization really does matter if you're trying to get a change made.
From what has been said here it sounds like the Medicare plan for seniors has a reasonably good reputation and may have the best shot. So, if I was a political party, I'd constantly use the "Medicare for All" phrase to build support for it, and counter the politically demonized "Socialized Medicine" term.
But make no mistake, in terms of COVID-19, I'd be in favor of WHATEVER works in terms of making sure the people get good healthcare protection and treatment for it.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
JQuest wrote:
Just for context, you should probably add, that's all in four months. Should I also add that there have been incidents - like the one in Florida where a state employee was fired for refusing to "cook the books" - that indicate that the 101,698 number (which just a few short hours later is now 102, 201) is very likely much lower than the actual number of victims of Covid_19 who've paid for their lives due to negligent and questionable "leadership" by orange people?
Or would you like to post about that seperately instead of laying the burden on me?
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
LightDreams wrote:
While I understand your principles, and your intent, in terms of whether people support a major change or not, the wording really DOES matter.
I remember back when Obamacare was being proposed and it was being demonized by some politicians. A survey asked Americans what they thought of it when it was referred to as "Obamacare" and the basics of the plan were outlined to them. At the time, the majority of Americans disapproved of it. BUT when they reran the exact same survey in the same way, but referred to it as "the Affordable Health Care Act", the majority of Americans strongly approved of it.
So political wording / demonization really does matter if you're trying to get a change made.
From what has been said here it sounds like the Medicare plan for seniors has a reasonably good reputation and may have the best shot. So, if I was a political party, I'd constantly use the "Medicare for All" phrase to build support for it, and counter the politically demonized "Socialized Medicine" term.
But make no mistake, in terms of COVID-19, I'd be in favor of WHATEVER works in terms of making sure the people get good healthcare protection and treatment for it. And my point is that when you are always playing on the opposing team's field, in the long run, home advantage wins. Time to change the venue. Using a demonized term in a positive context, intelligently, is the beginning of the process.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
Focuspuller wrote:
And my point is that when you are always playing on the opposing team's field, in the long run, home advantage wins. Time to change the venue. Using a demonized term in a positive context, intelligently, is the beginning of the process. “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
----- Isaac Asimov
Never before has this been so true. Trump's consistent disregard for the well educated, well trained experts available to advise him is well documented. He has made his presidency on that attitude. He has turned social media into a weapon--- using buzzwords like we discussed above.
So- with social media feeding those charged buzzwords to a public who adheres to 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'---- how do we even -begin- to have "intelligent" discussions on these subjects?
Photographer
JQuest
Posts: 2460
Syracuse, New York, US
Shadow Dancer wrote:
Should I also add that there have been incidents - like the one in Florida where a state employee was fired for refusing to "cook the books" - that indicate that the 101,698 number (which just a few short hours later is now 102, 201) is very likely much lower than the actual number of victims of Covid_19 who've paid for their lives due to negligent and questionable "leadership" by orange people?
Or would you like to post about that seperately instead of laying the burden on me? You should continue to post whatever you wish, that's the beauty of forums. I only added that comment to counter the argument that is frequently made that Covid-19 is no worse than the flu that people like to use.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
I cant say what I am thinking, it is beyond the (very much appreciated) relaxation of MM rules.............. Inside an Extraordinary G.O.P. Event: ‘Pressing Flesh and Kissing Babies’ Again At the South Carolina event, attended by Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott, there were few masks and no social distancing — and that was the point. By Astead W. Herndon May 29, 2020 Updated 3:01 p.m. ------ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/us/p … e=Homepage CONWAY, S.C. — The first mention of the coronavirus pandemic was a joke. A master of ceremonies was explaining to a crowd of more than 100 people why the keynote speakers — home-state Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott — were running a bit late. “You have to understand, they haven’t got to do any politicking for a while,” said the M.C., Robert Rabon of the Horry County Republican Party. “They’re like a kid in a candy store — they’re going wild!” [...] “Social distancing guidelines are recommended,” the invitation had said. “Hand sanitizer and face masks will be available.” In reality, according to interviews with more than a dozen attendees, the event was an active rejection of behavior that the hyper-conservative crowd has come to associate with liberal enemies in recent months — wearing masks and gloves, staying six feet away from other people, avoiding physical touch. [...]
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
JQuest wrote:
You should continue to post whatever you wish, that's the beauty of forums. I only added that comment to counter the argument that is frequently made that Covid-19 is no worse than the flu that people like to use. Gotcha, carry on!
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
an example of "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge" How do you have an intelligent discussion with someone who believes radio waves cause the coronavirus? 5G coronavirus conspiracy theory leads to 77 mobile towers burned in UK, report says Attacks on cell towers continue. Corinne Reichert May 7, 2020 8:34 a.m. PT ------ https://www.cnet.com/health/5g-coronavi … port-says/ Almost 80 mobile towers have reportedly been burned down in the UK due to false coronavirus conspiracy theories that blame the spread of COVID-19 on 5G. The arson attacks began in early April, with 77 towers now damaged, Business Insider reported Wednesday citing industry group Mobile UK. "Daily attacks are very low now but have not stopped entirely," a Mobile UK spokesman told Business Insider. As of April 21, 40 employees of one UK carrier have also been attacked physically or verbally, according to BT CEO Philip Jansen. "We've even had one Openreach engineer stabbed and put in hospital," Jansen said. The conspiracy theory is false -- radio waves can't cause a virus. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter have all committed to taking down misinformation. UK carriers have also asked people to stop burning mobile towers, and the UK's national medical director called the 5G conspiracy theory "complete and utter rubbish." The problem might not just be limited to the UK. Local police have reported 7 cell tower fires in the Montreal region of Canada over the last week. However, none of the damaged towers actually house 5G technology, reported CTV News.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
rfordphotos wrote:
an example of "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge"
How do you have an intelligent discussion with someone who believes radio waves cause the coronavirus? You can't and shouldn't even try.
The key work is "believes", once that word comes into play, logic, facts, etc. are completely out the window.
You name it, somebody believes it. My aunt used to believe that the Russians were going to invade the United States by landing cargo ships full of enemy combatants at Coos Bay Oregon - which is where she lived. She wrote my Mom (her sister) several letters about it.
One day as I was eating breakfast Aunt Ruth sat down at the table and began lecturing me on the vile aspects of pork (I was eating a sausage). She claimed that pork took twice as long as every other food to digest and that it caused long term debilitating effects because pigs were filthy, nasty creatures. I looked her and said "Aunt Ruth, my Uncle Jake (father's side of the family) has a hog farm and I've seen chickens run out into the field and pick corn out of the hog turds, so tell me - which is the dirtier animal?" Aunt Ruth got up and walked away, I had defeated her soundly.
I was eating a chicken sausage by the way!!!! 
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
rfordphotos wrote:
"... how do we even -begin- to have "intelligent" discussions on these subjects? Who said anything about "discussion"? There's no "discussion" with the Walking Dead.
How did anti-abortionists became "Pro-Lifers? For no other reason than in every place, every time, by every single foot soldier, that is what they called themselves. So now everyone refers to them as "Pro Life", and that made their opponents what...anti-lifers? Touchdown for the home team. It doesn't happen overnight, and the right is nothing if not relentless in pulling this stuff off. We need to do the same. Intelligently.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
Focuspuller wrote:
Who said anything about "discussion"? There's no "discussion" with the Walking Dead.
How did anti-abortionists became "Pro-Lifers? For no other reason than in every place, every time, by every single foot soldier, that is what they called themselves. So now everyone refers to them as "Pro Life", and that made their opponents what...anti-lifers? Touchdown for the home team. It doesn't happen overnight, and the right is nothing if not relentless in pulling this stuff off. We need to do the same. Intelligently. Not in any way disputing what you are saying.
Facts should matter. Truth should matter. Science should matter.Human compassion should matter. None of that seems to matter to the folks in charge. The words of a man like Anthony Fauci simply MUST carry more weight than the ignorant bullshit Hannity or Limbaugh spew....
It is the end of a long week.
Thanks to a totally incompetent response to the pandemic, more than 100,000 Americans have died. Nearly 1 3/4 MILLION have been infected. Trump still stands in front of the public daily and LIES about a drug HIS OWN AGENCIES say is unsafe..........
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
He is proving he could stand on 5th Avenue and commit murder---- and get away with it.
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
His economic "miracle" has turned into a total disaster....
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
so, tonite forgive me if I am struggling to find a glimmer of common sense left in the republican party. A scintilla of common decency in the far right. Any hope that America will wake from this horrible nightmare and move towards the potential we SHOULD have...
Everybody said "we are all in this together".... but a glance at the news shows that to be a lie.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
rfordphotos wrote:
Not in any way disputing what you are saying.
Facts should matter. Truth should matter. Science should matter.Human compassion should matter. None of that seems to matter to the folks in charge. The words of a man like Anthony Fauci simply MUST carry more weight than the ignorant bullshit Hannity or Limbaugh spew....
It is the end of a long week.
Thanks to a totally incompetent response to the pandemic, more than 100,000 Americans have died. Nearly 1 3/4 MILLION have been infected. Trump still stands in front of the public daily and LIES about a drug HIS OWN AGENCIES say is unsafe..........
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
He is proving he could stand on 5th Avenue and commit murder---- and get away with it.
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
His economic "miracle" has turned into a total disaster....
and yet his support stays steady at ~42-45%
so, tonite forgive me if I am struggling to find a glimmer of common sense left in the republican party. A scintilla of common decency in the far right. Any hope that America will wake from this horrible nightmare and move towards the potential we SHOULD have...
Everybody said "we are all in this together".... but a glance at the news shows that to be a lie. Look on the bright side, Ann Coulter has starting hosing Trump on the regular and somehow, she is spot on.
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
rfordphotos wrote:
...so, tonite forgive me if I am struggling to find a glimmer of common sense left in the republican party. A scintilla of common decency in the far right. Any hope that America will wake from this horrible nightmare and move towards the potential we SHOULD have.... Republicans had their great chance for redemption and they ignored it. Now they are at the river and they are going all in. Republicans with a shred of decency have already cashed in their chips.
Photographer
Ken Marcus Studios
Posts: 9421
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
On Thursday, the San Francisco Department of Public Health said people must wear masks if they are within 30 feet of someone not in their household, a far greater distance than the widely recommended 6 feet of social distancing.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
An important and historic judgement - the Supreme Court will not allow churches to be disregard the temporary mandates put in place by state governments to attempt to reduce the rate of infection. So, churches cannot simply open up and fill their seats without worry. I agree with this, it is not about religion - it is about protecting people from disease and death. https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-cour … 33836.html
Photographer
LightDreams
Posts: 4458
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
On Thursday, the San Francisco Department of Public Health said people must wear masks if they are within 30 feet of someone not in their household, a far greater distance than the widely recommended 6 feet of social distancing. This one amazed me, so I did a little checking. Apparently that 30 feet rule even applies to people outside in a park.
This is the first time, and I hope the only time, where I'll suggest that they've gotten too carried away in terms of protecting people. But this one is just so beyond the current science and experts. Especially when it comes to the outdoors...
Photographer
LightDreams
Posts: 4458
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Shadow Dancer wrote:
An important and historic judgement - the Supreme Court will not allow churches to be disregard the temporary mandates put in place by state governments to attempt to reduce the rate of infection. So, churches cannot simply open up and fill their seats without worry. I agree with this, it is not about religion - it is about protecting people from disease and death.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-cour … 33836.html Fortunately, It keeps the law as it was previously. It had to be shown that the regulations were clearly for the greater good, and not an attempt to discriminate against religions generally or attempting to target a specific religion.
The door that was being used to try and get a ruling, making religions exempt, was to try and demonstrate that it wasn't being applied in other situations. In reality it was being applied in the case of some other larger gatherings (sports events, concerts, movie theaters, etc) but was not being applied in every similar situation. That's why it was still a split, 5 to 4, decision.
Once again, we're seeing Justice Roberts (strangely enough) taking on the role of the "swing" vote. Who'd have guessed...
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
LightDreams wrote:
This one amazed me, so I did a little checking. Apparently that 30 feet rule even applies to people outside in a park.
This is the first time, and I hope the only time, where I'll suggest that they've gotten too carried away in terms of protecting people. But this one is just so beyond the current science and experts. Especially when it comes to the outdoors... This is not as onerous as it is being portrayed. It is less restricting than the guideline elsewhere that everyone outside must wear a mask at all times. The actual order reads:
"And a person who is alone or with only members of their household or living unit, is stationary in an outdoor area such as a park or patio, and is maintaining at least six feet of distance between them and the nearest people who do not live with them does not need to wear a Face Covering so long as they have one readily accessible."
https://www.sfdph.org/dph/alerts/files/ … 282020.pdf
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
On Thursday, the San Francisco Department of Public Health said people must wear masks if they are within 30 feet of someone not in their household, a far greater distance than the widely recommended 6 feet of social distancing. LightDreams wrote:
This one amazed me, so I did a little checking. Apparently that 30 feet rule even applies to people outside in a park.
This is the first time, and I hope the only time, where I'll suggest that they've gotten too carried away in terms of protecting people. But this one is just so beyond the current science and experts. Especially when it comes to the outdoors... Coronavirus updates: San Francisco imposes stronger mask requirements
By Amy Graff, Eric Ting
and Alyssa Pereira,
SFGATE Updated 9:53 pm PDT,
Thursday, May 28, 2020
---- https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspick … 300700.php
May 28, 3:05 p.m. The City of San Francisco is now requiring that individuals wear masks whenever they leave their homes and interact with people outside their households.
The city previously only required masks in mostly indoor situations, but it now mandates that individuals wear masks when exercising less than 30 feet from others or when passing people on the sidewalk.
During a Thursday press conference, Mayor London Breed stated that businesses have the right to turn away any individuals who are not wearing masks, but asked that individuals not confront non-mask-wearers.
"If you are not the police, please don't act like the police," she said. "The last thing we want to see are people who are confronting other people and creating what could escalate to a violent situation. Just let us do our job."
--------------------------------------
this is a section of the actual public health order with the (confusing) details
------------------------------------------
Department of Public Health San Francisco
Order of the Health Officer
ORDER OF THE HEALTH OFFICER No. C19-12b ORDER OF THE HEALTH OFFICER OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO GENERALLY REQUIRING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND WORKERS TO WEAR FACE COVERINGS
(PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY ORDER)
DATE OF ORDER: May 28, 2020
[...]
As we collectively go out into the community more, we need to have a corresponding increase in the steps we take to protect those around us. By doing so, we not only protect our fellow community members, but ultimately ourselves and our loved ones, especially those who are vulnerable due to age or health conditions. And in wearing a Face Covering around others, we show that we care for those around us. “My mask protects you, and yours protects me.” By ensuring that people generally wear Face Coverings when in public, the City is better able to continue to open businesses and resume activities in a safer manner to the benefit of all.
For these reasons, the City’s Health Officer is now revising the Face Covering order to more generally require wearing Face Coverings when people are outside their homes. The order also provides simpler guidance for when to wear a Face Covering as activities increase, such as when working or engaging in face-to-face transactions. The goal is to provide simple rules that we must all follow in the months to come.
In sum, going forward and for as long as this Order remains in effect as needed to address the pandemic, people must, unless an exception applies, wear a Face Covering when outside and when anyone else other than just members of their household or living unit is within 30 feet (10 yards). They must wear a Face Covering when in the workplace except when in a private space or area not regularly used by others. They must wear a Face Covering when preparing food or other items for sale or distribution to people who are not members of their household or living unit. They may remove their Face Covering when eating or drinking if they are alone or with only members of their household or living unit and nobody else is within six feet. And a person who is alone or with only members of their household or living unit, is stationary in an outdoor area such as a park or patio, and is maintaining at least six feet of distance between them and the nearest people who do not live with them does not need to wear a Face Covering so long as they have one readily accessible.
[...]
--- https://www.sfdph.org/dph/alerts/files/ … 282020.pdf
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
LightDreams wrote:
Fortunately, It keeps the law as it was previously. It had to be shown that the regulations were clearly for the greater good, and not an attempt to discriminate against religions generally or attempting to target a specific religion.
The door that was being used to try and get a ruling, making religions exempt, was to try and demonstrate that it wasn't being applied in other situations. In reality it was being applied in the case of some other larger gatherings (sports events, concerts, movie theaters, etc) but was not being applied in every similar situation. That's why it was still a split, 5 to 4, decision.
Once again, we're seeing Justice Roberts (strangely enough) taking on the role of the "swing" vote. Who'd have guessed... Justice Roberts is first and foremost a Constitutionalist. He is not 100% unbaised but he does understand the nature of being a Supreme Court Judge and that Constitutional Law should supercede politics. This "discrimination" against religion was a bit transparent and flimsy to get past somebody who has not abandoned all of their integrity, yet.
Photographer
LightDreams
Posts: 4458
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Thanks all on the clarifications to the San Francisco law.
Trying to sort through it, it sounds like if you're walking outdoors, including in the park, you need to wear a mask within 30 feet of others, unless they're from your own household. But if you, and others around you, are sitting in the park (i.e. stationary), then it drops down to 6 feet. If I have that correct...?
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
LightDreams wrote:
Thanks all on the clarifications to the San Francisco law.
Trying to sort through it, it sounds like if you're walking outdoors, including in the park, you need to wear a mask within 30 feet of others, unless they're from your own household. But if you, and others around you, are sitting in a spot in the park (i.e. stationary), then it drops down to 6 feet. If I have that correct...? That is the way I read it as well.
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
LightDreams wrote:
Thanks all on the clarifications to the San Francisco law.
Trying to sort through it, it sounds like if you're walking outdoors, including in the park, you need to wear a mask within 30 feet of others, unless they're from your own household. But if you, and others around you, are sitting in a spot in the park (i.e. stationary), then it drops down to 6 feet. If I have that correct...? Not a lawyer, but the gist seems to be: HAVE a mask when outside. WEAR a mask when in motion and within 30 feet of other non-household people. If stationary, HAVE a mask if more than 6 feet from others, WEAR it if closer.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
Currently - 103,353 Covid_19 deaths in the US.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
The mask requirements are part of this plan: San Francisco releases its own four-phase reopening plan; first key date is June 1 By Eric Ting, SFGATE Updated 2:46 pm PDT, Thursday, May 28, 2020 ---- https://www.sfgate.com/news/editorspick … 301418.php The City of San Francisco has created its own four-stage plan for reopening businesses over the coming weeks that will supersede the state plan. Mayor London Breed unveiled the plan during a press conference Thursday and stated that all dates are tentative; the pace of reopening can either accelerate or decelerate based on the city's five indicators for reopening. Here's a breakdown of the plan: Phase 2A: June 1 - Child care - Botanical gardens - Outdoor museums and historical sites - Outdoor curbside retail for services with minimal contact Phase 2B: June 15 - Most indoor retail - Outdoor dining - Summer camps - Sports with no fans - Private household indoor services - Religious services - Outdoor exercise classes - Non-emergency medial appointments Phase 2C: July 13 - Indoor dining - Hair salons and barbershops - Real estate open houses Phase 3: Mid-August - Schools - Bars - Nail salons, tattoo parlors and massage parlors - Gyms - Swimming pools - Playgrounds - Indoor museums Phase 4: To be determined - Concert venues - Nightclubs - Festivals - Hotels and lodging for leisure and tourism The plan does not impact other Bay Area counties that are currently under similar shelter-in-place orders. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties have not released detailed reopening plans to this point. In addition to the plan, Breed announced the city's shelter-in-place order will be extended indefinitely. That terminology is growing increasingly unimportant, however, since under the state plan, the shelter-in-place order is not formally lifted until large gatherings return — which is well after most businesses are allowed to reopen. San Francisco residents will be able to visit outdoor museums and botanical gardens on June 1, raising the question of whether it is really a "shelter-in-place" order if one can visit a botanical garden or go to the beach.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
Focuspuller wrote:
Not a lawyer, but the gist seems to be: HAVE a mask when outside. WEAR a mask when in motion and within 30 feet of other non-household people. If stationary, HAVE a mask if more than 6 feet from others, WEAR it if closer. best summary I have seen yet.... too bad the mayor's office didnt use it!
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
rfordphotos wrote:
best summary I have seen yet.... too bad the mayor's office didnt use it! Lawyers.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
Photographer
Focuspuller
Posts: 2766
Los Angeles, California, US
Shadow Dancer wrote:
I am a big Dolly Parton fan, have been for a long time. Great songwriter, and over the top stage personality.
She wrote a song for everybody during this time. The song/video is down the page again. Enjoy!
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/dol … 59394.html Good song. Worked with her once. Nice lady. Tiny little thing.
Photographer
Shadow Dancer
Posts: 9781
Bellingham, Washington, US
Focuspuller wrote:
Good song. Worked with her once. Nice lady. Tiny little thing. Awesome, we used to watch the Porter Wagoner show and she would be on, a brunette at that point.
Sheer coincidence but yesterday I listened to Trio II, the second of two albums she made with Emmylou Harris and Linda Ronstadt. Iconic stuff.
Was watching a Norah Jones live in concert video at a friend's home and Dolly made an appearance. Without any apparent effort, it instantly seemed that Norah and her band had completely vanished. The crowd went nuts, charisma overdose.
Her song will reach millions, we all need music during these times.
Photographer
rfordphotos
Posts: 8866
Antioch, California, US
I was trying to figure out what SF was using as justification for the 30 foot mask rule... I found this article---AND the uproar contesting it's validity. The media jumped on the story, and "enhanced" it's importance.... The folks that WROTE the study's report have repeatedly, loudly tried to make it plain this wasnt a study of covid19 infections, it was a study of aerosol droplets in a runner's wake... But... the internet happened, and the story became distorted....(imagine that) The authors had a Q&A session about the study after the initial publication---- this answer says it all: Question 4: What are the virological, medical or epidemiological conclusions from your study? None. This study does not draw any conclusions on the infection risk associated with particular social distances or droplet exposure. We are sharing these results with healthcare authorities and remain at their disposal for further information. It is obvious that no or reduced droplet exposure is better than larger droplet exposure. Therefore, the adjusted and equivalent social distances are to be preferred over the single value of 1.5 m. ---- https://medium.com/@jurgenthoelen/why-i … 44e12cc54d ------------------ This is the source of the 30 foot recommendation as far as I can find..... original article: Belgian-Dutch Study: Why in times of COVID-19 you should not walk/run/bike close behind each other. Jurgen Thoelen — Gladiator Labs Apr 7 ---- https://medium.com/@jurgenthoelen/belgi … df19c77d08 [...] The typical social distancing rule which many countries apply between 1–2 meters seems effective when you are standing still inside or even outside with low wind. But when you go for a walk, run or bike ride you better be more careful. When someone during a run breathes, sneezes or coughs, those particles stay behind in the air. The person running behind you in the so-called slip-stream goes through this cloud of droplets. The researchers came to this conclusion by simulating the occurrence of saliva particles of persons during movement (walking and running) and this from different positions (next to each other, diagonally behind each other and directly behind each other). Normally this type of modelling is used to improve the performance level of athletes as staying in each other air-stream is very effective. But when looking at COVID-19 the recommendation is to stay out of the slipstream according to the research. [...] On the basis of these results the scientist advises that for walking the distance of people moving in the same direction in 1 line should be at least 4–5 meter, for running and slow biking it should be 10 meters and for hard biking at least 20 meters. Also, when passing someone it is advised to already be in different lane at a considerable distance e.g. 20 meters for biking.
|
