I think you are conflating what I am talking about being the general scientific consensus that says that masks, social distance and vaccines work compared to specific local rules on shutdowns.

You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research.

ok, I'd like to see a scientific research that proves that face coverings (not medical face masks within the first couple of hours in a hospital environment, and not n95 masks, but all these various "face coverings" that are mandatory in the majority of places across the nation) that people use on a daily basis, without access to proper washing and cleaning facilities available at hospitals, are indeed effective at preventing the spread of the virus.

> You are using one locations shutdown rules to make a broad unfounded statement against the broader scientifically proven base of research.

Does it mean that in the context of this particular location and this particular ruling, you condemn Newsom and Garcetti and are willing to inform your elected government representatives about it?

Go do your research, I’m not here to do the research that you can’t be bothered to do yourself. And I’m not here to get into a political argument with you about lockdown in LA. You brought both those things up and clearly have an ax to grind. Best of luck sorting it out.

I will spare your time, there's no such a research. I've done my research and I'm just exposing your unsubstantiated broad claims about scientific basis of the lockdown measures introduced by the government figures of that locality, as well as your bias and hypocrisy. If your standard is scientific, you'll have no problem condemning the authors of the initiatives that ruin individuals' lives in the name of "safety proven by science".

My bias and hypocrisy - if that was your goal you have failed. All you have shown is that you have an ax to grind. I haven't talked about lockdown measures at all, only in response to you bringing them up. And at that I haven't even said anything. Like I said before, you have an ax to grind and aren't reading what I am writing.

I will wade in here. Lock down measure do restrict the spread of covid - that I won't refute - and that is scientific in nature and if you are of scientific worth you can't deny that. It's merely physics - if people don't see each other there is no ability to transmit the illness. The debate that you are referring to is whether the severity of the lockdown measures are worth the cost. Thats a political calculation. I haven't waded into that in any of my comments and don't intend now.

> I haven't talked about lockdown measures at all

> Thats a political calculation. I haven't waded into that in any of my comments and don't intend now.

you literally began this thread by posting under the comment that questions the degree of "responsibility for the costs of the measures they [authorities] take", and you proceeded with defending authorities' actions and stating that they have their skin in the game and that they follow the science. Your comment was about politicians making political decisions and enacting certain rulings regarding the lockdown.

> Lock down measure do restrict the spread of covid - that I won't refute - and that is scientific in nature and if you are of scientific worth you can't deny that.

What lockdown measures are you talking about? Generic lockdown measures or particular measures like enforcing "face coverings"?

> It's merely physics - if people don't see each other there is no ability to transmit the illness.

If people don't see each other, there's still a physical world they interact with. They can still pass stuff around and to each other, like food and clothing, right? Or do you live in a vacuum world of abstractions where no one sees nobody and lies still like a rock?

Are you trying to refute physics of breathing? Most of the virus spreads by air. The world of physics goods can be accomplished without breathing on other people hence the physical distancing. What world are you living in?

Yes the restrictions work at reducing spread. Literally all of them do reduce the spread of the virus. The question is the efficacy vs the cost not whether they reduce the spread of the virus.