Editor,
Should San Mateo County residents, particularly seniors and those with underlying medical conditions, consider the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s recommendation on indoor masking issued on June 28?
Editor,
Should San Mateo County residents, particularly seniors and those with underlying medical conditions, consider the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s recommendation on indoor masking issued on June 28?
It’s strange seeing this recommendation from Southern California that goes against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the California Department of Public Health that state that if you are fully vaccinated, you do not need to wear a mask unless taking public transit and a few other exceptions. They appear to be far more concerned about the Delta variant — which the CDC states now accounts for over half of all new coronavirus infections — than the Bay Area.
The San Mateo County COVID-19 dashboard on July 7 indicates that the effective reproduction number (R-effective) is 1.34, meaning that infections are on the rise. In fact, the Covid Act Now database shows the reproduction number, 1.29 on July 7, to be the second-highest in the state after San Benito County. The state average is 1.09 (anything over 1 means infections are increasing).
Covid Act Now also indicates that San Mateo County has the state’s fifth-highest case incidence of 7.3 daily new cases per 100,000 people. The state average is 3.3 per 100,000.
If you don’t want to be listed as a vaccine breakthrough infection statistic, it might be wise to consider what Los Angeles Public Health is recommending.
Irvin Dawid
Burlingame
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(3) comments
Especially. This person is continuing to wear a mask! The differences in advisories are going to cause major consequences.
Thanks for your positive comment.
I sort of regret how I ended my letter. The focus should not be on personal health but public health. While we know vaccines reduce viral intake, meaning transmission is greatly reduced, it is still unknown to what degree that asymptomatic, fully vaccinated people can transmit the virus, presenting a threat to unvaccinated adults and children and vaccinated but immunocompromised adults.
The main reason to mask indoors in public places is to reduce transmission as well as protecting one's own health.
On a side note, I've come to have much respect for WHO. I believe their guidance to be superior to that of the CDC, particularly after their May 13 masking guidance (see my post on Planetizen: "Will CDC's Revised Guidance for Fully Vaccinated People Prolong the Pandemic?"
https://www.planetizen.com/news/2021/05/113338-will-cdcs-revised-guidance-fully-vaccinated-people-prolong-pandemic
I'll continue to wear a mask (except outside with few people around) and try to not enter enclosed areas with a crowd.
Am in the high risk categories and have had 2 Pfizer shots...but the efficacy is NOT like most others. They would have the 95-97, but with my immunotherapy IV...my number is down.
UCSF won't provide a definitive number, as they don't know. Guessing in the 70 to maybe 50 range
With the Delta ravaging the world and reports of breakthrough infections to those who are 'healthy'...leaves to continue wearing a mask and avoiding crowds.
We are lucky that our leaders in the State and locally, dealt with Covid-19 early and maintained a high level
News has reported so many that let their guard down and reopened too early. Only to have infection/death rates raise.
Pet peeve on this topic...the virus didn't come over via the air currents, but via PEOPLE traveling to areas with high infection rates
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.