Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.

[Ratman_tf]

contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites.

Really? Between bites? I dunno, bars and restaurants are open here and you have to wear one coming in, and moving around the room, but once you're at your table, the mask stays off.

Clearly "lockdown" doesn't mean the same thing everwhere. But then, I guess we always knew that.

Yep, really. I don't know about all places, but the gaming pub I go to had that restriction. And then they made it so you have to eat outside. Eat outside in the rainy, cold season of western Washington. I simply stopped going.

[jhkim]

Unfortunately, no, I can't.  Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.

Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that.

I don't think that data is easily generalizable, though. It's not that all restaurants have the same risk - it depends on their practices, setup, and clients. There are countries where contact tracing has been successful - like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. Partly, that has meant that people there having given up a fair amount of privacy to share tracking data. From data especially there, we definitely see some trends. Superspreader events are a main source - it's not that any one type of business is inherently more risky than another. It's mostly about being indoors, breathing in proximity.

A preliminary analysis of 110 COVID-19 cases in Japan found that the odds of transmitting the pathogen in a closed environment was more than 18 times greater than in an open-air space. And the authors concluded that confined spaces could promote superspreader events. (The study has not yet been peer-reviewed.) Another preliminary preprint study, by researchers in London, examined clusters of COVID-19 cases and found that nearly all of them were indoor or indoor-outdoor settings. The largest clusters were found in indoor spaces such as nursing homes, churches, food-processing plants, schools, shopping areas, worker dormitories, prisons and ships.

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-superspreading-events-drive-most-covid-19-spread1/

There are more links to research in the article. Number of people, time together, spacing, and how hard they are breathing all make a difference. Singing, speaking, and aerobic exercise all produce more transmission - we see more spread from exercise than from yoga, for example.

I think the staged restrictions in California have aligned pretty well with this research - there are capacity restrictions on indoor spaces that reduce risk and separate people more. I think a key problem is that a lot of people ignore the guidelines and have large private gatherings - hence the post-holiday spike. I don't see any clear solution for that.

[Zirunel]

Unfortunately, no, I can't.  Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.

Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that. Sure, some governmental entities have refused to provide the data and a few have been caught lying about it, but what about all the rest? There's been nearly dead silence on the topic. We're still in the gut feeling stage, and it doesn't even appear to be a topic considered worth of conversation.

Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged  abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.

[Zirunel]

Unfortunately, no, I can't.  Locally, those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear. At present, they are dominated by recent exposures on a passenger ferry (not a typical risk location over the past year). I'd have to dig around to see if the older cases are archived anywhere I can find them.

Shame. If we lived in an abnormal unpoliticized world, there would have been a wave of shutdowns based on essentially gut feelings about which businesses were highest risk, but then after a few weeks we'd have seen reports like "well, ach-tually, 95% of all cases have been traced to occult bookstores, and gyms and hair salons are totally safe". But we're not seeing that.

I don't think that data is easily generalizable, though. It's not that all restaurants have the same risk - it depends on their practices, setup, and clients. There are countries where contact tracing has been successful - like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. Partly, that has meant that people there having given up a fair amount of privacy to share tracking data. From data especially there, we definitely see some trends. Superspreader events are a main source - it's not that any one type of business is inherently more risky than another. It's mostly about being indoors, breathing in proximity.

A preliminary analysis of 110 COVID-19 cases in Japan found that the odds of transmitting the pathogen in a closed environment was more than 18 times greater than in an open-air space. And the authors concluded that confined spaces could promote superspreader events. (The study has not yet been peer-reviewed.) Another preliminary preprint study, by researchers in London, examined clusters of COVID-19 cases and found that nearly all of them were indoor or indoor-outdoor settings. The largest clusters were found in indoor spaces such as nursing homes, churches, food-processing plants, schools, shopping areas, worker dormitories, prisons and ships.

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-superspreading-events-drive-most-covid-19-spread1/

There are more links to research in the article. Number of people, time together, spacing, and how hard they are breathing all make a difference. Singing, speaking, and aerobic exercise all produce more transmission - we see more spread from exercise than from yoga, for example.

I think the staged restrictions in California have aligned pretty well with this research - there are capacity restrictions on indoor spaces that reduce risk and separate people more. I think a key problem is that a lot of people ignore the guidelines and have large private gatherings - hence the post-holiday spike. I don't see any clear solution for that.

Were you replying to me or Pat? If me, then absolutely,  the data I was referring to are very much local, not general. WRT contact tracing, that has never been overwhelmed here and remains a (or the) strong first line of defense. If test-trace-isolate never gets overwhelmed, then hospitals need never get overwhelmed either. It's been pretty successful.

[Kyle Aaron]

those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear.

And here Down Under we got lots of exposure alerts for supermarkets - but not one case as a result of a customer going to the supermarket when someone else covid+ was there. Not one. Between staff at the place, yes. Especially staff working in coolrooms. But never from staff to customer, or between customers. Yet countless alerts for the places.

On the other hand, we had entire nursing homes get infected, and unfortunately about one-third of those infected died. And almost no alerts about them.

So you can't go by alerts. Most significant are the superspreading events. Around the world we're seeing more and more studies showing (for example) that 10% of people cause 80% of the infections, 20% cause 20%, and 70% infect nobody at all. Most significant are those 10% who spread to a stack of people. Some of it might be individual genetics - they can carry a high viral load to shed on others, yet show few symptoms - and some is circumstance, like a waiter working at three different conference centres. We can't test for the genetic part, so we have to look at the circumstances.

More than one person has started a database of the events, here's one guy talking about them. If we can sort out the superspreading events then the virus fizzles out.

• Nearly all SSEs in the database took place indoors: the exceptions are SSEs that took place in settings with both indoor and outdoor elements and where it is not clear whether transmission occurred indoors or outdoors
  
• The vast majority of SSE transmissions took place in settings where people were essentially confined together for a prolonged period (for example, nursing homes, prisons, cruise ships, worker housing)
  
• A feature of these settings is that it is typically outsiders rather than the people who live or work in them (or their relatives) who have control over the circumstances in which they work or live (nursing home residents, hospital patients or inmates typically have little control in terms of precautions they can take)
  
• The great majority of SSEs happened during flu season in that location
  
• Food processing plants where temperatures are kept very low (meat, dairy, frozen foods) seem particularly vulnerable to SSEs compared to other types of factories and plants where very few SSEs occurred

and another guy's taken this data and drilled down into it.

• outdoor events are wayyyyy safer than indoors, no matter how you look at it.
  
• There does appear to be a high overlap with traditional flu season
  
• Vocalizing (singing, shouting, etc) and refrigeration (colder conditions) have a definitive impact - having one or both of these characteristics meant that the event had an almost 2x increase on how many people got sick.
  
• Unfortunately determining usage of masks, social distancing, ventilation, etc is prohibitively difficult via the sourced news articles, so I can't answer those questions through SSEs.

Interestingly, there are no known cinema cases. It appears to be that there are high ceilings (allowing the aersols to disperse), good airconditioning with filters, and people are mostly quiet. This is probably why there are no supermarket superspreading events for customers, either - the places always have high ceilings, the doors are opening and closing a zillion times a day letting fresh air in, and people aren't shouting and singing - but it's different for the staff, especially those working in the coolrooms.

I would summarise it as, the risk factors are,

• sustained close contact, and things which amplify that contact, like,
  
• airconditioning
  
• shouting, singing, sharing eating implements
  
• in a cold climate
  

[Ratman_tf]

Local gaming pub is going to remain locked down despite the change to Phase 2, citing the report of the UK variant in Snohomish county.
I would not be surprised if the UK variant became dominant and we returned to Phase 1 before the end of the month.

[Pat]

Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged  abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.

Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.

[Pat]

I don't think that data is easily generalizable, though. It's not that all restaurants have the same risk - it depends on their practices, setup, and clients. There are countries where contact tracing has been successful - like South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Japan. Partly, that has meant that people there having given up a fair amount of privacy to share tracking data. From data especially there, we definitely see some trends. Superspreader events are a main source - it's not that any one type of business is inherently more risky than another. It's mostly about being indoors, breathing in proximity.

Then we should just ignore data? I can't believe you'd argue that. And even if you were, it should still be available.

Agree on superspreader events, but most of those seem to be related to things like weddings and conventions, which doesn't justify any of the shutdowns of businesses and schools. Even plane flights don't seem linked to superspreader events, and at least superficially being trapped shoulder to shoulder with many strangers for hours on end seems to be an ideal situation for it. (Note, planes are still transmission vectors that bring sick people into new areas where the disease can then spread exponentially, but at least once airlines started taking a few minimal precautions in the spring, there doesn't seem to have been a mass infection on an airline.)

[Pat]

Most significant are the superspreading events. Around the world we're seeing more and more studies showing (for example) that 10% of people cause 80% of the infections, 20% cause 20%, and 70% infect nobody at all. Most significant are those 10% who spread to a stack of people.

Thanks for the links.

Edit: After looking them over, a few conclusions. (You touched on a few, but I'm adding some new details or emphasis.)

• That's very strong evidence for aerosolization. The first link goes into greater details on the reason why, but essentially large droplets behave similarly indoors and outdoors, while small droplets do not (they quickly dissipate rather than building up), and the number of superspreader events (SSEs) that happened outdoors is tiny.
• Covid-19 appears to be seasonal. Which makes sense, given aersolization as the primary mechanism for spread (people indoors, windows closed), but other evidence I've seen is inconclusive.
• Shutting down large events like concerts and sports seems justified. They're rare (though that could be selection bias), but when a SSE happens at one of them, they lead to huge numbers of cases (600+ on average).
  
• Nursing homes and prisons are responsible for a ridiculous number of SSE cases. (More than 40%.) Why aren't we focusing huge numbers of resources on these two institutions, and paying much less attention to bars and hair salons? Even if we as a society have decided we don't care about old people and criminals (that's my assessment of societal values based on the response to sars2), SSEs are responsible for jumps in the number of cases in the wider community. Helping the elderly and prisoners helps everyone.
• Pure speculation, based on #4: Could America's high prison population help explain why the US was hit relatively hard?
• The 40+% from nursing homes/prisons jumps to 60+% when we include healthcare. That's not hospitals -- they're listed separately, and only amount to 1.6% of the SSE cases. Think rehab or long term care. Those high rates suggest we need to encourage better practices by other healthcare professionals.
• Talking bad. Another reason to avoid people talking on cell phones in stores.
• Corona-chan likes refrigeration. That's interesting, because the last study I saw that tried to explain why areas like SE Asia and Africa had lower incidence rates dismissed temperature as a factor, and attributed it more to things like humidity. Not that it's a direct contradiction, because high and low temperatures don't necessarily have opposite effects, but it's something worth exploring further.

[HappyDaze]

Of note: Phase 2 still involves heavy restrictions. 25% capacity limit, 6 feet distance and masking when not eating or drinking. Which is silly when I'm contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites, but like I said, our restrictions are based on fear.

That's not what they ask you to do in Florida. You wear your mask while you order and until the first food/drink arrives, then you take it off and don't put it back on until right before getting up to leave the table. No between bites bullshit.

[oggsmash]

Of note: Phase 2 still involves heavy restrictions. 25% capacity limit, 6 feet distance and masking when not eating or drinking. Which is silly when I'm contantly taking my mask off and putting it back on again between bites, but like I said, our restrictions are based on fear.

That's not what they ask you to do in Florida. You wear your mask while you order and until the first food/drink arrives, then you take it off and don't put it back on until right before getting up to leave the table. No between bites bullshit.

  There are reasons people flee NY and go to florida.  Or flee Cali for anywhere. 

[HappyDaze]

There are reasons people flee NY and go to florida.

Are we talking about Trump again?

[TNMalt]

Only reason to flee either place is due to the high cost of living or lake effect snow. Lake effect snow is satan's snow, it destroys the soul while it looks beautiful on the ground. Though if I was in LA, I'd leave for San Diego or the cheaper suburbs. 

[Zirunel]

Apparently, I live in an "abnormally unpoliticized world." Or you live in a hypercharged  abnormally politicized one. Not sure which, but the scenario you outlined is precisely what happened here. Case in point, hairdressers. Initially assumed there was no way they could operate safely in a covid environment, and they were shut down. But public health was not in the business of defining "essential" businesses or closing by sectors, it was all about protocols. Hairdressers presented reasonable protocols and were allowed to reopen. To this day no case locally has ever been traced to a hairdresser. Consequently, they go about their business.

Clearly you don't, because you just said you can't provide a single citation, which fully supports the idea nobody is out there sharing the data that demonstrates which businesses are hotspots, and which aren't. All we have is rhetoric and unsupported claims.

No, clearly I do. Our "lockdown," such as it was, played out exactly as you propose it should in an  "abnormally unpoliticized world."  Even down to the specific example you proposed (hairdressers). So by your own criteria, I must live in such a world. And I agree with you. Covid has not been politicized here, and the result is a more pragmatic response.

[Zirunel]

those data are presented as active alerts, and each one drops off the charts after two weeks as the risk is presumed to disappear.

And here Down Under we got lots of exposure alerts for supermarkets - but not one case as a result of a customer going to the supermarket when someone else covid+ was there. Not one. Between staff at the place, yes. Especially staff working in coolrooms. But never from staff to customer, or between customers. Yet countless alerts for the places.

On the other hand, we had entire nursing homes get infected, and unfortunately about one-third of those infected died. And almost no alerts about them.

So you can't go by alerts. Most significant are the superspreading events. Around the world we're seeing more and more studies showing (for example) that 10% of people cause 80% of the infections, 20% cause 20%, and 70% infect nobody at all. Most significant are those 10% who spread to a stack of people. Some of it might be individual genetics - they can carry a high viral load to shed on others, yet show few symptoms - and some is circumstance, like a waiter working at three different conference centres. We can't test for the genetic part, so we have to look at the circumstances.

More than one person has started a database of the events, here's one guy talking about them. If we can sort out the superspreading events then the virus fizzles out.

• Nearly all SSEs in the database took place indoors: the exceptions are SSEs that took place in settings with both indoor and outdoor elements and where it is not clear whether transmission occurred indoors or outdoors
  
• The vast majority of SSE transmissions took place in settings where people were essentially confined together for a prolonged period (for example, nursing homes, prisons, cruise ships, worker housing)
  
• A feature of these settings is that it is typically outsiders rather than the people who live or work in them (or their relatives) who have control over the circumstances in which they work or live (nursing home residents, hospital patients or inmates typically have little control in terms of precautions they can take)
  
• The great majority of SSEs happened during flu season in that location
  
• Food processing plants where temperatures are kept very low (meat, dairy, frozen foods) seem particularly vulnerable to SSEs compared to other types of factories and plants where very few SSEs occurred

and another guy's taken this data and drilled down into it.

• outdoor events are wayyyyy safer than indoors, no matter how you look at it.
  
• There does appear to be a high overlap with traditional flu season
  
• Vocalizing (singing, shouting, etc) and refrigeration (colder conditions) have a definitive impact - having one or both of these characteristics meant that the event had an almost 2x increase on how many people got sick.
  
• Unfortunately determining usage of masks, social distancing, ventilation, etc is prohibitively difficult via the sourced news articles, so I can't answer those questions through SSEs.

Interestingly, there are no known cinema cases. It appears to be that there are high ceilings (allowing the aersols to disperse), good airconditioning with filters, and people are mostly quiet. This is probably why there are no supermarket superspreading events for customers, either - the places always have high ceilings, the doors are opening and closing a zillion times a day letting fresh air in, and people aren't shouting and singing - but it's different for the staff, especially those working in the coolrooms.

I would summarise it as, the risk factors are,

• sustained close contact, and things which amplify that contact, like,
  
• airconditioning
  
• shouting, singing, sharing eating implements
  
• in a cold climate
  

There are a lot of variables to work through in this post, and yeah, some are surely significant.

Just to pick out a few,

Locally, we have had occasional supermarket alerts, but not "lots." And it's important to remember what those alerts are for. They are a "public" part of test-and-trace. Especially in a low-covid environment, people responding to them means transmission is quashed before it becomes a problem. It may look like those exposures don't turn into anything, but that's just because the alerts did what they are supposed to do.

WRT meat packing plants, I'll note that they have become much less of a problem. Not because they are suddenly warmer now, but because employees are now more widely spaced on the line, along with other protocols.