# Am I missing something here? (re: reopening of bars, etc... now) **URL:** \ **Category:** The Quarantine Zone\ **Tags:** covid-quarantine\ **Created:** [October 6, 2020, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356 "2020-10-06T17:27:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 59
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2021, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1161 "2021-01-09T03:42:34Z")
Please don’t misrepresent my posts. I never – never, ever – said that I believed one venue was ten times as infectious as the other. What I said was that one venue could be more infectious than another – meaning have a greater base level of infectiousness because of things like density and duration, or mask wearing or not, or lowered inhibitions – and yet _still_ contribute less to overall spread in the community. When asked how that was possible, I used round numbers for the sake of argument to illustrate the point. If that method of reasoning is lost on someone, then I don’t know what to say. There is nothing illegitimate about it, and to say that it reflects a belief that the numbers are real measures is to misrepresent what I said. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2021, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1162 "2021-01-09T03:46:13Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > I never – never, ever – said that I believed one venue was ten times as infectious as the other. What I said was that one venue could be more infectious than another – meaning have a greater base level of infectiousness because of things like density and duration, or mask wearing or not, or lowered inhibitions – and yet _still_ contribute less to overall spread in the community. So when I argued that “greater level of infectiousness” is probably closer to 1/100 than 1/10 and you said “nuh-uh” and > [@SayTwo](#): > > I don’t think the studies that have tried to either model or estimate the measure have arrived at a multiple remotely that large. with no actual cite, you were doing exactly what, other than making things up? Feel free to back up your feelings, or continue to make up numbers to feel better about your position. Neither matters to me, because it’s blatantly clear there’s no avenue for honest discussion here. ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2021, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1163 "2021-01-09T03:54:51Z")
Let me get this straight. You think it’s clear, somehow, that if we could know the real measure, in some empirical way, it’s ‘probably closer to 1/100 than 1/10’ and you think it’s _me_ that’s making things up? You think that’s honest discussion? I don’t know what the real measure is. I’m certainly willing to concede that all other things being equal, time spent in a nightclub carries more risk of infection than the same amount of time spent in a grocery store. But I don’t know if it’s ten times more. And I don’t know if it’s 100 times more. If you asked my guess, I would guess closer to ten times than one hundred. But I’m not going to tell you that I have any empirical data to base that guess upon. I was wondering if you did for yours. ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2021, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1164 "2021-01-09T04:06:08Z")
But if you want to look at some attempt at an actual multiple – though of course it’s based on a model and not empirical observations, with all the limitations that entails – you can look at item “c” in figure 5 here: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3/figures/8](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3/figures/8) There you see their estimates for additional infections compared to not reopening _per POI_, not per category. So, in other words, what one restaurant would contribute, on average, compared to one grocery store. The differences in that chart aren’t anywhere _near_ 100 times. They are much, much closer to 10, if not half that. I don’t pretend that this study is the final word on it, or anything of the sort, because I can see the obvious limitations the study has. But I also can see that they are making a strenuous effort to do something besides guess (or I suppose as you put it, ‘make numbers up’), and they aren’t arriving at anything remotely approaching 100 times. I am very happy to have an honest discussion about it, which is why I asked if you had seen something that would support a multiplier of 100. In fact, I’m still eager to consider it if you have. Have you? Or is that just a guess. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1165 "2021-01-12T17:48:28Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > You and I are never going to see this the same way. On that much I think we can agree. > [@SayTwo](#): > > You lay out an explanation with a fair amount of moving parts, and one that is riddled with internal inconsistency. (Not every municipality experienced the same scenario despite similar approaches, and some municipalities with markedly different approaches did experience similar scenarios.) The alternative explanation is simpler, having to do with well established and long-observed epidemiological principles, and is thus much more firmly rooted in what before 2020 was known as science. I have previously asked for a source or sources of information for dates of interventions, levels of interventions, demographics of different geographic locations, and compliance within those geographic locations. That kind of information is the detail needed to piece out the kind of detailed analysis you are insisting on - a level of detail that probably needs a federal grant to dedicate time to do fully. I sure hope someone is doing that somewhere, but I’m not the guy. I am well aware that a seasonal variation is a possibility. We are just now approaching one year of this disease. We simply do not have the data to assess any seasonality. Sure, we can compare across the globe to see if patterns emerge, but then we get into those complicated factors that you point out make pulling out trends difficult. But the basic trends of data are clear. Composite numbers for the US match pretty damn well what the experts predicted. We started a spike early, so we implemented heavy shutdowns, mostly in the large urban areas where the spikes were occurring. Cases and deaths dropped. We then began a supposedly slow, incremental, controlled reopening that in a lot of places was fast, somewhat incremental, and not particularly controlled. Numbers of cases and deaths rose - as predicted. We then had a cycle of trying to tighten up a bit at the end of summer, with some drop in numbers, followed by the reopening of schools and reductions of limitations in other areas. Cases and deaths increased. Then came Halloween and people partied and numbers took a bump. Then came Thanksgiving, and people decided to visit their families and friends, and we got a increase. Next came Christmas, which is moving things upward, followed by New Year’s, which we haven’t really seen the impact from yet. But the trend is clear. The numbers are soaring. Hospitals are facing bed and staff shortages, ambulances sit hours with patients in them to get admitted because there is no room. Morgues and funeral homes are filling up. I just saw one funeral home in S. Cal. that had the chapel stacked with full caskets and the proprietor said she has probably turned down a thousand families because they can’t fit them in. Even if that is an exaggeration, cut that by a factor of 10 and you still have 100 families turned down. Meanwhile, yes we have a vaccine rolling out - slowly. We also have more and more people openly defiant about not wearing masks. We have more people resisting control measures. And the case counts and deaths match that behavior. Frankly, that you can’t see that pattern is puzzling. You’re looking for a seasonality pattern when you can’t even see the direct correlation between behavior and cases/deaths. > [@SayTwo](#): > > Yes, I saw that. What do we do now, since we have multiple studies with conflicting conclusions? Believe whichever fits our preferred agenda? Or maybe see what else shakes out of the science tree before drawing a conclusion? Maybe constraining behavior based on the more dangerous assumption until the science gets sorted out? > [@SayTwo](#): > > I think that once we realized (or, have we realized?) that our mitigation efforts were not proving successful in stamping out the virus, we should have tried something different. The fact that we are close to a year into this thing, with case and death counts skyrocketing in a number of jurisdictions yet with seemingly no motivation at all to try a new approach is mind-boggling to me. You have yet to propose an alternative approach. The default alternative is fully reopen. Is that your plan? If not, _ **tell us what is it you have in mind** _. > [@SayTwo](#): > > Getting out of our own way means ceasing the kind of damage we’re seeing by schools being closed for a year or more, industries being shuttered, livelihoods being lost in countless numbers (you will note there is no daily dashboard for those), all by our own sword. Those things don’t seem to have anything to do with fighting the virus, evidently, so I don’t accept that the latter part of your question even has any relevance. You are correct that there is a massive tragedy beyond the deaths and the permanent impacts of the disease on the ones who catch it. The damage to our children’s education is significant. The loss of jobs and businesses is terrible. The economic hit is tough. But the economic hit was going to be tough. The thing is, the solution we ended up with is a piecemeal inadequate approach. I fully agree we ended up with a partial solution that has had devastating impacts. But I feel the better solution would have involved a massive government financed shutdown for a controlled period to kill the transmission, followed by a reopening with heavy testing and strong contact tracing and quarantining. Sure, that would have been expensive, too, but look at the damage you so rightly lament and tell me that my solution would have been worse. I’m saying we should have taken a controlled hit that _kept paying people to shut down_. Pay businesses to go on hold, pay their employees to stay home. Then be able to get things rolling again while simultaneously controlling the spread of the disease. Which would also have probably meant opening schools and restaurants and bars, maybe with crowd size limits. We didn’t do that. But that doesn’t mean reopening everything right now is the solution, either. That might start to improve the economic problems, but the cost in lives would surely escalate, and the system is already stressed to the limits. As for whether the things we are doing are having any impact on the disease, I simply disagree. The epidemiologists are the ones suggesting those controls. They’ve recommended stronger versions in a lot of places, but those have not been followed - starting from the President of the United States setting the tone. The population as a whole has tired of restrictions and started defying them. See Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s for examples. See mask compliance dropping. And once again, I implore you to tell us how you would fight the spread of infection **right now** until the vaccines can get spread enough to improve things. ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1166 "2021-01-12T17:55:01Z")
Well, tell me what you make of Florida…South Dakota…Iowa. Are there chapels there that are turning away a thousand families? I mean, you seem to be painting with a broad brush, all across the United States. Do you think it’s fair to look at jurisdictions that have relatively few restrictions and compare their situations? ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1167 "2021-01-12T17:55:28Z")
FWIW, your link above has little radio buttons you can toggle to see the effects of various venues on the infection rate. Restaurants are by far the highest risk on there. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1168 "2021-01-12T18:19:42Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > Well, tell me what you make of Florida Why do you keep asking about Florida? Their cases are climbing. They had a lockdown early in the pandemic like everyone else. There are restrictions by county like everyone else. The only difference is that the governor is making a fuss about some of the restrictions some of the counties placed. De Santis just lifted penalties for the bans and put some restrictions around some of the bans, but the bans are still in place. Besides De Santis being in the news all the time, what’s remarkable about Florida? > [@](#): > > ### Restrictions have been lifted in Florida > > Updated Jan. 4, 2021 > > Florida has not implemented any new restrictions. On Oct. 22, Gov. Ron DeSantis loosened restrictions on visits to nursing homes, saying higher risk of infection is outweighed by positive mental health benefits of increased social interaction. On Nov. 25, DeSantis extended a September executive order aimed at preventing business shutdowns during the pandemic. The order barred local emergency ordinances that could “prevent an individual from working or from operating a business.” It also prevented local governments from requiring restaurants to operate below 50% indoor capacity and required local governments to quantify the economic impact and the public-health need for limits on indoor capacity below 100%. > > **Stay-at-home order:** Started March 20, 2020; ended on April 30, 2020 > > **Affected sectors:** Beaches, Outdoor recreation > > **Caseload:** The number of confirmed new cases is **growing** , with **111,894** for the seven days ending January 11 compared to **96,515** the seven days prior. > > **Mobility:** For the seven days ending Jan. 6, 2021, the share of residents leaving their homes was about **0.11% less** than the seven days prior, data from SafeGraph show. > > **Read more:** [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/11/25](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/11/25/florida-gov-desantis-extends-order-blocking-business-shutdowns/6424728002/) [usatoday](https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/coronavirus-reopening-america-map/) ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1169 "2021-01-12T18:21:06Z")
I’d start with the difference between Florida and California, if you’re looking for something remarkable. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1170 "2021-01-12T18:24:50Z")
Could spell out the differences between CA and FL and why you think they’re so remarkable, along with the numbers for those differences? ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1171 "2021-01-12T18:27:00Z")
I guess we could, but we’ve just been given some hard data from another poster in the thread, about funeral homes in California turning away a thousand families, and we don’t have those same reports from Florida. The remarks are already being made. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1172 "2021-01-12T18:29:01Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > we don’t have those same reports from Florida. Because no one but you is talking about Florida. Do you have some other data from Florida? ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1173 "2021-01-12T18:33:58Z")
Florida has a death ratio around half that of the worst-hit parts of the country, states that have had and continue to have more in the way of restrictions than Florida has had for the past several months. Florida has a trajectory at present that is not as severe as that of California, a state with far more in the way of restrictions. In relation to California, it is the _absence_ of data that is remarkable. The ambulances aren’t queued up for hours in Florida, they aren’t stacking caskets in the gift shops and building makeshift morgues, and the waiting list for funeral services is not a thousand families long. Unless those stories have gone unreported, that is. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1174 "2021-01-12T18:39:08Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > Florida has a death ratio around half that of the worst-hit parts of the country, states that have had and continue to have more in the way of restrictions than Florida has had for the past several months. Florida has a trajectory at present that is not as severe as that of California, a state with far more in the way of restrictions. Any data for that? Having read your numbers before, I won’t be taking your word for that. Also, the population density figures would help too. ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1175 "2021-01-12T18:44:39Z")
Just the deaths-per-million stat over at [Worldometers](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/). Today it’s showing 1074 for Florida, with New Jersey and New York over 2000. California has been running 550-600 deaths reported on recent days, Florida a fair amount under 200 most days. California has a little under double the population of Florida. I don’t pretend that’s a rigorous analysis, but the rough numbers paint a clear enough picture. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1176 "2021-01-12T18:49:03Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > But if you want to look at some attempt at an actual multiple – though of course it’s based on a model and not empirical observations, with all the limitations that entails – you can look at item “c” in figure 5 here: > > [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3/figures/8](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3/figures/8) > > There you see their estimates for additional infections compared to not reopening _per POI_ , not per category. So, in other words, what one restaurant would contribute, on average, compared to one grocery store. The differences in that chart aren’t anywhere _near_ 100 times. They are much, much closer to 10, if not half that. Okay, so I dug in to that study a bit. I don’t see anywhere where they discuss their Susceptibility Exposure Infectious Removed model and what those terms mean and how they established those numbers. Maybe it’s buried in the part of the report with all the math. I just don’t feel like digging in to all that. But that’s a quibble. I will accept for this discussion that that model makes sense. For looking at all the comparisons, I will point out they provide no data whatsoever for clubs or bars as a class, so we can’t use this study to measure them. You said to look at plot c, the effect of each Point of Interest (POI). (Yes, I had to look that up, as well as Census Block Groups - CBGs.) That puts full-service restaurants as the second biggest effect behind hotels & motels. Using the interquartile median (yes, I had to go look all that “interquartile stuff” up too), FS restaurants are about 0.65 per 100k. Grocery stores are about 0.03 per 100k. That’s about a factor of 22. Great, not 100. But I disagree that is the correct comparison. Look at plot d, additional infections per class. FS restaurants are way higher than any other listed class. FS restaurants are about 7,000 per 100k. Grocery stores are about 210 per 100k. That’s a factor of 33. Okay, again not 100. Glad we established that. Now go on to look at the second part of your assumptions, how time spent and crowd size affects the numbers based on POI class. Look at [Figure 2 plot d](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3/figures/2) of the report. FS restaurants have a much more significant impact on additional infections than any other category listed (which doesn’t include bars, so we don’t know how they compare). FS restaurants is right around 7,000 additional infections per 100k people compared to not reopening. Number 2 is fitness centres (their spelling) at about 2,000. Grocery stores comes in at around 230. That’s around 30 times worse for FS restaurants. Limited service restaurants are still around 1,000. And what does the description of the figure say? > [@](#): > > **d** , Reopening full-service restaurants has the largest predicted impact on infections, due to the large number of restaurants as well as their high visit densities and long dwell times From the discussion paragraph: > [@](#): > > We found large variation in predicted reopening risks: on average across metro areas, full-service restaurants, gyms, hotels, cafes, religious organizations and limited-service restaurants produced the largest predicted increases in infections when reopened (Extended Data Fig. [5d](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3#Fig8)). Reopening full-service restaurants was associated with a particularly high risk: in the Chicago metro area, we predicted an additional 595,805 (95% confidence interval, 433,735–685,959) infections by the end of May, more than triple that of the POI category with the next highest risk (Fig. [2d](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3#Fig2)). What about model limitations? From their [Supplementary Information (.pdf)](https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-020-2923-3/MediaObjects/41586_2020_2923_MOESM1_ESM.pdf) > [@](#): > > Our model itself is parsimonious, and does not include such relevant features as asymptomatic transmission; variation in household size; travel and seeding between metro areas; differentials in susceptibility due to pre-existing conditions or access to care; age-related variation in mortality rates or susceptibility (e.g., for modeling transmission at elementary and secondary schools); various time-varying transmission-reducing behaviors (e.g., hand-washing, mask-wearing, and holding events in outdoor spaces); and some POI-specific risk factors (e.g., ventilation). Mask wearing and ventilation - two big differences between grocery stores and restaurants and bars. So, after all their analysis, what is their recommended strategy? > [@](#): > > Our results suggest that infection disparities are not the unavoidable consequence of factors that are difficult to address in the short term, such as differences in preexisting conditions; on the contrary, short-term policy decisions can substantially affect infection outcomes by altering the overall amount of mobility allowed and the types of POIs reopened. Considering the disparate effects of reopening plans may lead policy-makers to adopt policies that can drive down infection densities in disadvantaged neighbourhoods by supporting, for example, more stringent caps on POI occupancies, emergency food distribution centres to reduce densities in high-risk stores, free and widely available testing in neighbourhoods predicted to be high risk (especially given known disparities in access to tests[2](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2923-3#ref-CR2)), improved paid leave policy or income support that enables essential workers to curtail mobility when sick, and improved workplace infection prevention for essential workers, such as high-quality personal protective equipment, good ventilation and physical distancing when possible. As reopening policies continue to be debated, it is critical to build tools that can assess the effectiveness and equity of different approaches. We hope that our model, by capturing heterogeneity across POIs, demographic groups and cities, helps to address this need. More stringent caps on occupancy. Food distribution centers. Free and widely available testing. Improved workplace prevention such as PPE and ventilation and physical distancing. And improved sick leave or income support for sick workers. Any of that sound familiar? Like maybe metering at grocery stores, mask mandates, work from home, paying people to not work, especially when sick. Limiting group sizes. Reducing non-essential gatherings. You know, all the things that the Coronavirus Task Force recommended and Dr. Fauci has been advocating. All the things Americans are failing to do. ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1177 "2021-01-12T19:12:06Z")
That’s good analysis of the study. I like it! You’ve made some excellent points. There is still more to it, though, as I’m sure you yourself gleaned too. One of the big motives of that study was to look at disparity in risk between socioeconomic groups, and in so doing they found that a ‘grocery store’ is not a grocery story is not a grocery store. I believe that their model found that grocery stores in one of the cities, I think Philadelphia, were about ten times as risky as those in other places. (Or maybe it was just grocery stores in less affluent areas versus more affluent areas, but the point still holds.) The reason being, of course, that grocery stores in those areas were smaller and denser and people spent more time there, and that’s really all this particular study is concerned with. Me, I think a major drawback of the study design is that they break up ‘retail’ by sub-category after sub-category after sub-category, from womens’ clothing to kids’ to used to new and so on, but a restaurant is a restaurant is a restaurant. It’s just not apples to apples, because most people think ‘going out shopping’ or ‘going out to eat’, they don’t think ‘going shopping to a used shoe store’ or ‘going to eat at a Thai place’. It would have been funny if they had made a separate category for each type of cuisine! Then we could have found out if pizza is more dangerous than falafels. They also simply got rid of all ‘parent’ categories, like ‘shopping malls’, because otherwise they couldn’t figure out how not to count each venue inside twice. But again, people think about ‘going to the mall’, not ‘going to that one pet store in the mall and nothing else around you counts’. There are further limitations on the way they approached things, too. Did you read the part about the tests they did to see if density and duration were the right parameters for the model? It’s because when they tweaked the model they got results that didn’t make certain places, like restaurants, as dangerous as these certain two sources said they were, so they dismissed those out of hand. Well, for one thing, that’s tautological, as far as I can see, and it calls the entire study into question. But what’s more, you should see the two sources they chose… I mean, really! Look them up. It’s embarrassing. About as far from rigorously scientific as you get. It’s like ratings of 1 to 5 on danger level for broad categories, in infographic format, published on a website by a couple professors, with suggestions to print and hang around town. With no data or analysis included. None. I mean, really, you can’t make this stuff up. They based this entirely mathematically rigorous model on a premise that itself includes no scientific or mathematical rigor at all. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1178 "2021-01-12T19:15:29Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > Just the deaths-per-million stat over at [Worldometers](https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/). Today it’s showing 1074 for Florida, with New Jersey and New York over 2000. California has been running 550-600 deaths reported on recent days, Florida a fair amount under 200 most days. California has a little under double the population of Florida. Your chart shows 1,074 deaths per million for Florida and 769 deaths per million for California. According to you, Florida has less restrictions and more deaths per million than California. That’s unsurprising. What is your point in comparing FL and CA? ---
**Author:** ![SayTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e56c9b/32.png) [@SayTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SayTwo)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1179 "2021-01-12T19:33:32Z")
My point is that the trajectory California is on is not good. Not good at all. In fact, it’s very bad. It’s much worse than that of Florida. And if it’s true that reopening is very dangerous, you would expect exactly the opposite. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2021, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356/1180 "2021-01-12T19:48:36Z")
> [@SayTwo](#): > > I guess we could, but we’ve just been given some hard data from another poster in the thread, about funeral homes in California turning away a thousand families, and we don’t have those same reports from Florida. The remarks are already being made. I brought that up because you previously said Americans were smart enough to notice bodies piling up in the streets. I’m pointing out once again that we aren’t piling them in the streets, we are piling them in refrigerated trailers and funeral homes. Sure, not everywhere is as bad as S. Cal. Check out this from [IBISWorld](https://www.ibisworld.com/us/industry/florida/funeral-homes/12656/) about funeral homes in Florida. > [@](#): > > In coronavirus hotspots such **Florida, which currently has the second-highest number of coronavirus cases in the United States** , funeral homes, crematories and morgues are experiencing a temporary spike in demand for their services. However, this spike in demand is increasingly being met through cremation. This trend is anticipated to be particularly true in Florida, which has a higher rate of cremation (71.2%) than the United States (57.1%) overall in 2020. Bolding added. Or [this](https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/23/counting-florida-coronavirus-dead-includes-post-mortem-covid-19-testing/5147971002/) - excerpts: > [@](#): > > For medical examiners in Florida this included instructions on how to handle a death if it was referred from a hospital, the public or a funeral home. In every case, a positive COVID-19 test was required, according to guidance from the state Medical Examiners Commission. > > The scale of how many missed deaths exist may take months or years to determine, but analysis of overall death data from several European nations by The Economist indicates that the number of COVID-19 deaths may be 30% higher than reported in those localities. > > That’s concerning because an accurate death tally is an important piece of data to be considered as elected officials such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis plan for reopening the state. How confident can they be in that tally, which currently stood just below 900 as of Wednesday morning. > > There’s no easy answer. Medical examiners say they can’t test everyone on the slightest suspicion, nor have they been directed to. > > Disagreements over that “Florida death” question between the Medical Examiners Commission and the Florida Department of Health meant that snowbirds and other non-residents who die in the state are recorded by medical examiners but not reflected in the DOH state death totals. > > For now Florida has not adopted the CDC’s updated guidelines [that do not demand a positive test for the fatality to be counted]. The criteria remains that a positive test must accompany the dead. So, maybe the stats aren’t quite as clear. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356.md?page=58) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-missing-something-here-re-reopening-of-bars-etc-now/922356.md?page=60)