This is true but it doesn't explain the difference between urban California and the NY/NJ/PA area which has been repeatedly devastated by the virus and must have as high a percentage of survivors with some level of immunity as LA County as well as a relatively high percentage of people vaccinated.

If anyplace in the country should be approaching "herd immunity" by now it should be that part of the east coast which was struck early and hard and is again being hit hard.

This is what I find puzzling. I wish there were a serious and thorough report available as to whether there are a significant number of reinfections or persons infected who have been vaccinated. It worries me that one thing that could explain the situation is a virus mutant escaping the immunity generated either naturally by earlier viral strains or by the vaccines.

I would implicate public transit dependency and multi-person/multigenerational households. I don't think enough cities in either the US or UK have yet opened indoor dining (my understanding is it's closed in the UK and it still is in CA) to implicate that. But especially cities with large numbers of poor and/or immigrant families often have lots of people under one roof and all it takes is one of those people to catch the virus at work or in some other activity in the community like riding transit, bring it home and everybody gets it.

Sure, but that’s much less practical in a tiny restaurant in the West Village than it is in a Cheesecake Factory in suburban Dallas.

Obviously I would much rather eat at the former, but the latter is more able to adapt to this “social distancing” BS.

In the U.K., the data last fall showed that far more people caught Covid by returning to the office than by going to restaurants, pubs, cafes and gyms combined. But that was without restaurants at anything like full capacity.

In Florida restaurants have been 100% open with no social distancing for like 9 months now and the numbers aren’t really any worse than several states that have had strict lockdowns, so make of that what you will.

Depending on what tier the county is in, most of California opened indoor dining on March 15, but at reduced capacity. LA County is in the orange tier, which means restaurants can allow indoor dining at 50% capacity or a maximum 200 people, whichever is fewer. My partner and I have already eaten indoors at restaurants a few times already, but we're still preferring to eat outside, just to be safe, being that we're not fully vaccinated yet.

I'm not sure how updated this map is, but this ABC7 link shows you which California counties are in what tier: https://abc7news.com/california-stay...kdown/6393906/

And of course come June 15, according to Governor Newsom, California will eliminate the tiers and fully reopen the whole state; masks will just still be required to go inside businesses for the time being.

Big day: The US today passed the UK (30% to 29.8%) in what Bloomberg defines as vaccine "population coverage"*

*“Population covered” divides the doses administered for each vaccine type by the number of doses required for full vaccination.

The UK is still way ahead in percentage of population given one or more doses and way behind in percentage of population "fully vaccinated".

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/c...-distribution/

We've reached the point where dining outdoors is preferable even during pre-pandemic times. The weather is so nice lately. Of course, there will be the threat of wildfires soon, so that might put a damper on outdoor dining.

So in other words, population density.

Well not really. There is probably a strong correlation with overall population density, but that doesn’t make it a causal relationship as you know.

Let's talk about THIS (which hit Wall Street pretty hard early today before the news was tempered a bit) and which is serious if not reversed soon because the one-shot J&J vaccine has been seen as the solution to immunizing hard-to get groups like the homeless, illegal immigrants and so forth. Many such people will not show up for second doses.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-see...d=hp_lead_pos1

https://www.wsj.com/articles/j-j-ast...article_inline

The condition in question is called "thrombotic thrombocytopenia" (platelets are also called "thrombocytes" so the name means "clots with a reduced number of platelets" which can occur basically when the platelets are used up forming clots.

An article published in the New England Journal of Medicine discusses the situation:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104840

When people talk about other than immediate allergic reactions to vaccines, what is usually feared is some type of auto-immune phenomenon. According to the German research, these recombinant adenovirus vector vaccines from J&J and AstraZeneca seem to be causing the development of platelet-activating antibodies against platelet factor 4 in rare individuals, for some reason all younger women (so far).

The situation may ultimately come down to deciding whether 6 cases out of 6.8 million doses is sufficient to suspend use of the vaccine or, perhaps, limit its use to men over a certain age.

6 out of 6.8 million.

Horrible for those six people, obviously, but this is the government being overly cautious and nothing more.

Agreed. The case in CA's Central and Imperial Valleys is an example. These are areas with overall low population densities but they are also places where immigrant agricultural workers live in crowded, shared housing. There are similar though less extreme examples in French "suburbs" or other places where various factors cause people to share housing with many others but not necessarily in places with overall dense populations.

^ Yes, exactly, I think pausing for a few days to analyze may be prudent, but this is in no way enough to stop its use altogether.

Yes, but if we do continue using the J&J vaccine on the populations I mentioned--the homeless, undocumented immigrants and so on (anyone who may be difficult to get back for a second dose)--will we be seen (and accused by the media) of giving these less fortunate people a "second best" or inferior shot? I think you can bet on it.

The worst outbreaks in the U.S. have occurred in states that are among the least urbanized.

True. I don't know how to get around that but I know for sure I was disappointed when I found out I wasn't getting the JJ shot.

So plenty of people will still take that tiny risk even when they have the facts, I sure would have.

testing notwithstanding, it's completely possible that more contagious variants simply haven't made it there yet. with some luck, they might be able to beat them by vaccinating quickly enough.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-la...erica-56723439

Will we ever get past the idea that only old people get really sick with COVID?

Has Brazil vaccinated their old yet? If so, this is not and should not be surprising. Of course, young people will make up a larger portion of those hospitalized if the old are vaccinated. This makes complete sense.

It's significant because Brazil is in the midst of its worst spike in deaths of the entire pandemic.

Covid is....Dude.....like never going to end

No, because the old are overwhelmingly more likely to get very ill and die of Covid. That will always be the case.

The question is whether more of them were vaccinated in Brazil. I don’t know because that article doesn’t reveal that info

No one has ever said this.

What many of us are saying is that the risk from Covid is many orders of magnitude higher for older people, that younger people rarely have life-threatening illness, and that the risk to young people in itself does not justify lockdowns or any of these restrictions, only the risk to older people. All of this (barring the last point which is inherently subjective) has been well established fact since at last May 2020 and borne out by mounds of statistical data.

As you know I am of the view that governments, even if they couldn’t legally make different rules for older people, should have had clear and strong messaging to the effect that if you are over 70, you should continue to stay at home, avoid social contact, and avoid close contact with family even as things opened up. If this had been done and somewhat adhered to, then everywhere could have been like Florida and gone back to some degree of normalcy by June of last year.

As for your article, there are over 200 million people in Brazil and the population skews younger than the US, let alone Europe, so of course the raw numbers of young people with “severe” Covid will sound like a big number. That doesn’t mean the risk justifies the disruption to life. I risk my health or even life every day I go snowboarding than I do going out to bars during Covid.

Anyway lol. Per previous discussion. It is not Illinois allocating doses to Chicago. It is the Federal government. Chicago receives its supply of vaccine from the federal government allocated separately from the state. As such, the city operates on its own framework and timetable. One third of the doses administered in Chicago have gone to non residents. It is what it is, whatever. But that is why it is hard to get a shot here in Chicago - doses received based on population but administered based to a larger population.

Anyway managed to get my first dose today of Pfizer in Forest Park though Cook County!

25% of metro New Orleans has been fully vaccinated as of Monday. https://ladhh.maps.arcgis.com/apps/o...f9046c213331ed

In case you were wondering:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america...=hp_lead_pos12

According to this - https://data.cdc.gov/Vaccinations/Na...ions/sxbq-3sid - Chicago, Philadelphia and New York are unique as the only cities getting their own allocations from the feds. But if the state accepts their argument that they are vaccinating non-residents, there’s nothing to prevent it from giving them additional supplies. I guess special treatment has a downside. Too bad.

Anyway you went and stole your shot from outside the city and I bet you aren’t alone.

The old "cytokine storm" problem. Active immune systens can be a problem. Just like the 1918 pandemic. Young people were not spared. Looks like covid variants are getting more troublesome for the young.

Apparently that is no longer true in Brazil for whatever reason. Before vaccination of large numbers the very sick young were swamped by the very sick old but now the old are protected and its obvious that the Brazilian variant, at least, can make even the young very sick if they refuse to act prudently.

Pedestrian, if you could choose between Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, which would you pick? Some data I've seen seem to show the moderna vaccine can have slightly tougher side effects, especially after the second dose. My elderly mom has to have the vaccine, and can pick either one. Both vaccines do seem to be effective. Any thoughts? When you had the vaccine, how bad were the side effects if any? Pfizer or Mod.,?

No matter how much it bothers you how Chicago administers it's shots the fact of the matter is you are being ridiculous and obtuse. Why this bothers you is beyond me. Boredom? And I did not steal any shots. That's a hell of an accusation. Why would you do that? You are in your mid 70's. I have nothing in common with you. Move on and enjoy retirement instead of accusing and debating with people several decades younger than you about them getting a vaccine shot. I am a resident of Cook County thus am able to get shots from Cook County. They even recommend it.

NYC has its own public health system with the capacity to administer vaccines at scale. That's probably why NY's doses are split between the city and state (also nearly half the state's population lives in the five boroughs). NYC also allows non-residents who work in the city to get vaccinated at an NYC run site.

When I was booking my own appointment in NY, it was very hard to find vaccine appointments anywhere near the NY Metro area on the state portal, but there were plenty of appointments available if you drove 200 miles upstate. I ended up finding a last minute slot on the city's hospitals website.

Also, I believe that if you go to one of the pharmacies that are permitted to administer vaccines (Walgreens, Rite-Aid, etc.), there is no residency requirement at all.

I know you’re obsessed with the idea that it’s “not just us old folks” who are at risk from Covid, but statistically that is the case. Give it a rest.

Ugh.... so much nonsense being spewed in this thread....

Yep

There is zero evidence anywhere that COVID is suddenly changing into something it is not (and never will be) and becoming more deadly for young people.

If anything is happening, the cases are skewing younger because the elderly have been vaccinated, and hence the proportion of people dying is younger simply for the same reason. Any simple understanding of math and statistics will reveal that.

You really are getting confused.

I'm saying the same thing that you are.

Sorry, I know that being scared of COVID is becoming a rather fun pet project for you, but COVID is NOT EVOLVING into something that is more deadly for the young.

When you save the older people from dying, then the only people left to die are younger people. So even though younger people are still REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY unlikely to die, they are the only people left getting Covid, and when the virus is spreading to tens/hundreds of millions of them, they are like 90% of the deaths now. Simple common sense and grasping of statistics reveals this.

From NBC Los Angeles:

LA County Will Allow Indoor Events, Sports Fan Attendance Starting Thursday

By City News Service • Published April 13, 2021 • Updated on April 13, 2021 at 6:19 pm

Los Angeles County on Thursday will begin allowing attendance at indoor sporting events, theater performances, concerts and conferences, but the county will impose a stricter capacity limit at large event venues -- such as Staples Center -- than the state guidelines.

The state announced earlier this month that it will ease its COVID-19 restrictions, effective Thursday, allowing a return to indoor events, but individual counties are always permitted to imposer stricter regulations than the state authorizes.

County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said Monday the county will largely adopt the state rules, but it will impose a stricter capacity limit on indoor venues with 1,501 seats or more.

The state's guidelines for larger arenas allow for attendance of 10% of the venue's capacity, or 2,000 people, whichever is smaller. If all attendees are fully vaccinated or have proof of a negative COVID-19 test within 72 hours of the event, the state allows attendance to increase to 35% of capacity.

Los Angeles County, however, will limit attendance at larger venues to 25% of capacity when all guests are vaccinated or tested. That means all sporting events at Staples Center -- home to the Lakers, Clippers and Kings -- will be limited to 25% capacity instead of the 35% allowed by the state.

Staples Center will require all fans to provide proof of vaccination or a negative COVID test to be admitted.

The state and county rules will restrict attendance at large and small arenas to in-state residents only, and attendees must have pre-purchased, digital admission tickets. Masks are required at all times, except when people are eating in designated dining areas, and six feet of physical distancing between groups must be maintained. All venues must have a weekly worker testing program, and all suites are limited to 25% capacity.

For smaller indoor venues that hold up to 1,500 people, capacity is limited to a maximum of 15%, or 200 people. The capacity can increase to 35% if everyone has proof of a negative COVID test or of being fully vaccinated.

For private events such as meetings, receptions or conferences, outdoor gatherings can be held with 100 people, or up to 300 if everyone is vaccinated/tested. Indoor activities are permitted only if all guests are vaccinated or tested, and attendance is limited to a maximum of 150 people.

For informal private social gatherings, the new rules will allow outdoor gatherings of up to 50 people, with required masking and physical distancing. Indoor social gatherings are "strongly discouraged,'' but can be held with a maximum of 25 people or 25% of the venue's capacity, whichever is lower, with required masks and no eating or drinking unless everyone attending has been vaccinated.

Link: https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/l...virus/2572562/

Everybody is at risk for PASC though, as well as 1/3 of covid patients will have neuropsychiatric conditions. If people don't feel they are at risk, they should volunteer at hospitals and participate in forced injections (of covid) for scientific research. Then if possible, mass produce vaccines from these special humans.

Thank you LA, for finally doing something reasonable.

Now if only the rest of the "lock down first, fuck everyone's feelings, think about it later" States will follow

Masking and shots should literally be the only thing we are doing now. No other policies are necessary. All COVID measures should immediately be halted as being burdensome and damaging.

My point was that residency requirements are absurd. You are the one disagreeing. It looks to me as if Chicago (city) has painted itself into a corner by getting a separate allocation of vaccine which limits it to that amount. But still it could ask for some vaccine from Illinois to provide to non-city residents if it chose to and it should do that it is vaccinating them.

Your agism doesn't become you and I think the mods should instruct you that there's no policy here that people of any age can't debate issues. Is it because you recognize how limited your perspective is that you are trying to intimidate me?

This isn't so much something LA is doing on its own.

It's actually very complicated. CA has a fairly complex and regulated statewide system of policies on when counties can open to what degree based on criteria too complex to explain. As the article sopas ej posted states, the state is allowing LA to do what it is doing as it is allowing other counties to do similar things.

But it is even more Byzantine than that. Gov. Gavin Newsom is fighting a recall election. A part of the criticism of him has been the complexity and rigidity of the lockdown policies he imposed. As is happening all over the country, COVID fatigue has got people angry at governments that are too restrictive and California has been one of the most restrictive. So the current relaxation and even abandonment of previous policies is something Newsom is being forced into to stay in office. He will probably succeed--unlike when Gov. Davis was recalled and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger, there's no big name, popular candidate selling Newsom's job. But still he seems to be running a little scared and loosening COVID restrictions is part of his strategy.

Interesting idea:

https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/he...y-16098770.php

There seems to be a certain desperation setting in here over hearing what people don't want to hear and their only response is agism and ad hominem attacks.

The fact is that there is considerable speculation, and I admit it IS speculation so far, that certain of the newer virus variants do have more of predilection to infecting younger people and making them sicker.

https://fortune.com/2021/04/07/the-c...ounger-people/

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n879

Now urban political and the rest who are in denial that this virus may be evolving in ways they aren't happy to see should probably start looking at research and facts rather than inside their own stubborn heads.

When you stop pretending you are invulnerable and governments should let people like you do as you wish no matter whom it puts at risk.

What I posted just above doesn't compare Brazil to other countries so it's relatively young population is irrelevant. It compares what's happening now with the new virus variant with what happened previously in Brazil. And Brazil hasn't vaccinated enough residents old or young to explain the difference either. It's Brazilian scientists who are saying they believe the new variant is more dangerous to younger people but you and the rest of the COVID fatigue brigade seem in denial as much as ever.

^ Nothing you are posting suggests anything that even remotely hints that new variants of the COVID are suddenly taking a "chill pill" on the 65 and older crowd and are now becoming more deadly for younger people.

It's not the case, and you will never find such evidence. In your own words, you are "speculating", and your speculation is way off.

What is happening is:

1. The elderly are isolating themselves more (here and in Brazil) and thus spreading and getting the virus less
2. The elderly are getting far more vaccine than younger people
3. Brazil's population skews young
4. The variants spread more rapidly, and because of #1-3 above, you are seeing a higher proportion of hospitalized and dying people being younger.

This is so easy to comprehend, give me a break, Pedestrian.... Nothing to see here, lets move on....

Data:

People over 65: Majority vaccinated
People under 65: Only a small proportion vaccinated

Therefore, deaths and hospitalizations from COVID are gradually skewing younger

How a silly person who isn't thinking interprets this:

Gosh, George....lookee here, it seems like dat dere virus is starting to kill us young folk, gosh it must be dem new variants!

How anybody with a noggin on their shoulders interprets this:

Hmmmm, the vaccine is working. The variants are spreading faster and through younger people, and killing some of them. Fewer old people getting ill and dying. Thank God for the vaccine! Lets get those young people vaccinated!

More young people dying obviously means the virus has run out of old people to infect, lol. Got it.

Tell it to the Brazilian scientists and the CDC who are saying just the opposite. It's you who lack evidence. I keep posting the opinions of others and you keep trying to refuse me with your own which are clearly just your own.

The majority of the old are NOT vaccinated in other than the US and UK and a few other small countries like Israel. They are not in Brazil where I am citing research.

I think you've made your unwillingness to listen to anyone but yourself clear enough.

I don't get what's funny about that. In a nutshell, it's evidence that the vaccine WORKS.

What we are observing is exactly what we would expect to happen if we targeted the over 65 crowd and vaccinated them first, all while a new and highly contagious variant is spreading through the population.

The elderly are relatively spared, while the new variant is rapidly spreading though a relatively unvaccinated and younger population.

Cases will rise and death rates will skew younger.

Everything that you'd expect to happen with a working vaccine is exactly what we are observing. What about that do you have a problem with?