latimes--2020-10-29--Coronavirus is far more widespread in Orange County than reported, study shows

The number of COVID-19 infections in Orange County may be nearly eight times higher than previously thought , a new antibody study suggests .
While the screening , a collaborative effort between UC Irvine and the O.C .
Health Care Agency , demonstrates that the coronavirus may be far more widespread — though less deadly — than official numbers indicate , researchers said more work is needed to understand the level of protection that antibodies provide and how best to address disparities in how the virus affects different populations .
“ Our study demonstrates that , while a significant number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and developed antibodies to COVID-19 , much of the county still remains vulnerable to the virus , ” Bernadette Boden-Albala , director of the university ’ s Program in Public Health , said in a statement .
“ For researchers , there is a lot more work to be done.
” From July 10 to Aug. 16 , nearly 3,000 county residents were tested for an array of coronavirus antibodies , which are produced as part of the body ’ s natural immune response to a virus .
Of those screened , 11.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 .
“ There was this lurking suspicion that there ’ s a large fraction of people who have had it that did not know , ” Tim Bruckner , an associate professor of public health at UCI , said in a statement .
“ Either they had symptoms and did not seek care , or they did not have symptoms and had no reason to go.
” As of Aug. 16 when the study finished collecting samples , the county had an official coronavirus case count of 46,057 .
That figure represents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population of nearly 3.2 million .
An 11.5 % infection rate , which is nearly eight times higher , would equate to more than 367,000 cases .
A total of 59,442 have been infected and 1,468 people are known to have died from COVID-19 in Orange County to date .
Health officials and researchers have previously said that the true number of those infected by the coronavirus likely outpaces confirmed cases , as many people may not have gotten tested or needed medical attention .
“ I think it would just confirm our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that there are people who are walking around asymptomatic and , if they don ’ t get tested , we don ’ t know , ” Dr. Clayton Chau , county health officer and Health Care Agency director , said during a media briefing Thursday .
“ That ’ s why we encourage people to get tested , especially essential workers.
” The latest study also reflects previously noted disparities regarding COVID-19 infection .
Researchers said the highest prevalence of antibodies was found among Latino residents , 17 % , and low-income @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the greater prevalence among Latinos “ is consistent with some of the testing and hospital data that has come out of Orange County and nationwide ” and that “ as we look toward the fall and flu season , this data also justifies enhanced planning and resources in communities likely to be hit hardest.
” Hispanic and Latino residents account for roughly 48 % of Orange County ’ s confirmed coronavirus cases for which that demographic information is available , and 43 % of total deaths — even though they make up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s population , according to Health Care Agency data .
Chau said the study ’ s findings further illustrate that the county needs to be laser-focused on tackling disparities in healthcare .
While those issues are not new , nor are they unique to Orange County , Chau said that “ the pandemic truly brings and has pushed the issue of health equity to the forefront.
” While the proportion of Orange County residents with COVID-19 antibodies is significantly higher than previously estimated , researchers said the study ’ s findings do not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immunity — a term that refers to the point at which enough of the population is sufficiently resistant to a disease that it ’ s unlikely to spread from person to person .
Researchers said that would require at least 70 % of residents to have antibodies .
Though Orange County ’ s new COVID-19 case rate remains well below most of its Southern California neighbors , Chau said that to additionally stem the spread “ everybody needs to do their part in terms of the nonmedical public health measures ” — such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coverings in public and observing physical distancing .
“ All of us are working very hard ; all of us are trying to work together as a region to ensure that the community is not running into the fatigue issue with masks , social distancing and what have you , ” he said .
Another area of concern , particularly heading into the holiday season , is gatherings .
“ We know that as we are getting toward the holidays that the community will have a very hard time adjusting to not getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are as Americans : We celebrate our holidays with our loved ones , ” Chau said .
But health officials throughout the state have said holding celebrations attended by many different households creates an environment that ’ s ripe for potential coronavirus spread .

The number of COVID-19 infections in Orange County may be nearly eight times higher than previously thought, a new antibody study suggests.
Although the screening, a collaborative effort between UC Irvine and the O.C. Health Care Agency, demonstrates that the coronavirus may be far more widespread — though less deadly — than official numbers indicate, researchers said more work is needed to understand the level of protection that antibodies provide and how best to address disparities in how the virus affects different populations.
“Our study demonstrates that, while a significant number of O.C. residents were already exposed and developed antibodies to COVID-19, much of the county still remains vulnerable to the virus,” Bernadette Boden-Albala, director of the university’s Program in Public Health, said in a statement. “For researchers, there is a lot more work to be done.”
From July 10 to Aug. 16, nearly 3,000 county residents were tested for an array of coronavirus antibodies, which are produced as part of the body’s natural immune response to a virus.
Of those screened, 11.5% were found to have antibodies for COVID-19.
Advertisement
“There was this lurking suspicion that there’s a large fraction of people who have had it that did not know,” Tim Bruckner, an associate professor of public health at UCI, said in a statement. “Either they had symptoms and did not seek care, or they did not have symptoms and had no reason to go.”
Tracking coronavirus in Orange County The latest maps and charts on the spread of COVID-19 in Orange County, including cases, deaths, closures and restrictions.
As of Aug. 16 when the study finished collecting samples, the county had an official coronavirus case count of 46,057.
That figure represents 1.44% of the county’s population of nearly 3.2 million. An 11.5% infection rate, which is nearly eight times as high, would equate to more than 367,000 cases.
A total of 59,442 have been infected and 1,468 people are known to have died from COVID-19 in Orange County to date.
Health officials and researchers have previously said that the true number of those infected by the coronavirus likely outpaces confirmed cases, as many people may not have gotten tested or needed medical attention.
“I think it would just confirm our predictions that transmission is in the community and that there are people who are walking around asymptomatic and, if they don’t get tested, we don’t know,” Dr. Clayton Chau, county health officer and Health Care Agency director, said during a media briefing Thursday. “That’s why we encourage people to get tested, especially essential workers.”
The latest study also reflects previously noted disparities regarding COVID-19 infection. Researchers said the highest prevalence of antibodies was found among Latino residents, 17%, and low-income residents, 15%.
Advertisement
Boden-Albala said that the greater prevalence among Latinos “is consistent with some of the testing and hospital data that has come out of Orange County and nationwide” and that “as we look toward the fall and flu season, this data also justifies enhanced planning and resources in communities likely to be hit hardest.”
Hispanic and Latino residents account for roughly 48% of Orange County’s confirmed coronavirus cases for which that demographic information is available, and 43% of total deaths — even though they make up only 35% of the region’s population, according to Health Care Agency data.
Chau said the study’s findings further illustrate that the county needs to be laser-focused on tackling disparities in healthcare.
While those issues are not new, nor are they unique to Orange County, Chau said that “the pandemic truly brings and has pushed the issue of health equity to the forefront.”
While the proportion of Orange County residents with COVID-19 antibodies is significantly higher than previously estimated, researchers said the study’s findings do not mean the county is anywhere near herd immunity — a term that refers to the point at which enough of the population is sufficiently resistant to a disease that it’s unlikely to spread from person to person.
Researchers said that would require at least 70% of residents to have antibodies.
Though Orange County’s new COVID-19 case rate remains well below most of its Southern California neighbors, Chau said that to additionally stem the spread “everybody needs to do their part in terms of the nonmedical public health measures” — such as regular hand washing, wearing face coverings in public and observing physical distancing.
“All of us are working very hard; all of us are trying to work together as a region to ensure that the community is not running into the fatigue issue with masks, social distancing and what have you,” he said.
Another area of concern, particularly heading into the holiday season, is gatherings.
“We know that as we are getting toward the holidays that the community will have a very hard time adjusting to not getting together, because that’s who we are as Americans: We celebrate our holidays with our loved ones,” Chau said.
But health officials throughout the state have said holding celebrations attended by many different households creates an environment that’s ripe for potential coronavirus spread.


latimes--2020-10-29--Can L.A. County Supervisors remove Sheriff Villanueva? Experts say the options are limited

The bitter discord among Los Angeles County ’ s top elected leaders ramped up a notch this week with a push by two supervisors to explore what it would take to remove Sheriff Alex Villanueva from his elected position .
The Board of Supervisors ’ vote on the matter was postponed by two weeks .
Questions remain , though , about whether the board has the power to force Villanueva out or if the proposal is more of a symbolic gesture to pressure him as he faces mounting calls to resign .
The answers are complicated , and Villanueva has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remove him .
Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas — who authored the proposal in one of his last moves before next week ’ s election , in which he ’ s running for a City Council seat after serving the maximum 12 years on the board — said it ’ s still worth at least looking into .
“ We will not be able to do that if we don ’ t try , ” he told The Times .
Ridley-Thomas and Supervisor Sheila Kuehl , who coauthored the motion , have criticized Villanueva ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Inspector General , which oversees the Sheriff ’ s Department , and echoed calls for his resignation .
“ It has become increasingly clear that the sheriff ’ s blatant disregard for transparency and accountability requires a more forceful response , ” their motion says .
Villanueva has said he has no plans to quit and that supervisors looking to undo the results of a lawful election could trigger a legal battle that would cost millions of dollars .
“ Let ’ s set aside the past and work out our differences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , offering a more conciliatory tone than usual .
He blamed the chief executive office , though , for not funding positions to comply with an “ avalanche ” of records requests under a new transparency law that made some internal police records public .
“ Transparency and accountability do not come cheap , ” he said .
Legal and governance experts said there are limited options in removing an elected officer short of a recall or them committing a crime .
“ There are plenty of checks and balances already in place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Steve Cooley .
“ The only way that some of these harebrained ideas will ever reach fruition is if the Constitution is changed .
...
If they change the Constitution , that would impact every single one of California ’ s 58 elected sheriffs.
” “ When you ’ re elected , it means something , ” said Frank V. Zerunyan , a professor on the practice of governance at USC .
Villanueva “ was elected — he ’ s using the Constitution to his favor , rightfully so , to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him for saying what he ’ s saying.
” But there is case law as well as an old state attorney general opinion that suggests there ’ s a way to remove an elected sheriff in California , said Mario Mainero , a law professor at Chapman University Fowler School of Law .
In 2001 , then-California Atty .
Gen. Bill Lockyer concluded that a county charter may grant the board of supervisors the authority to remove the sheriff , district attorney or other county officer for cause with a four-fifths vote .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ court in 2005 when it declared constitutional an ordinance approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors that allowed them to remove a sheriff for certain reasons — including flagrant or repeated neglect of duties , misappropriation of public property , violation of any law related to the performance of the official ’ s job duties or willfully falsifying a official document — with a four-fifths vote .
“ It makes it very clear that the board then has the power to remove , but is also clear they can not remove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mainero said .
“ They can not be doing this because they have a disagreement with the manner of performing law enforcement functions .
They ’ re going to have to do it based on something other than that.
” A sheriff ’ s refusal to comply with subpoenas or oversight laws could be justification for his removal , Mainero said .
Villanueva , however , would have to argue those actions interfered with his law enforcement duties .
“ He ’ s got to make that argument , because that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But it doesn ’ t mean it ’ s true , and it doesn ’ t mean it ’ s not true.
” A judge would have to decide “ whether or not that ’ s a pretext by him or whether this really is an interference , ” Mainero said .
In San Bernardino County , the board of supervisors never actually tried to remove the sheriff , said county spokesman David Wert .
That case , he said , began in 2002 when officials noticed a provision on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board the power to do so without any standards or process , “ leaving it vulnerable for abuse.
” So they created the ordinance , which then-Sheriff Gary Penrod challenged , arguing that it conflicted with the Peace Officers Bill of Rights and his independence under state law , Wert said .
The appellate court didn ’ t weigh in on the bill of rights argument in its 2005 decision .
The ordinance says that the removal of an elected county officer “ is an extraordinary act and should occur in only the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interests of the citizens of the county can not be reasonably served by any other means .
These circumstances include the exposure of the county , or its employees , to irreparable harm.
” The proposal in Los Angeles County drew criticism from Ron Hernandez , president of the Assn .
of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs , the union that represents rank-and-file deputies .
“ As far as the board motion , I think they are blinded by their frustration and focused on the personality conflict instead of the safety of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any elected body who is focused on finding a way to override the voters has lost touch with the constituents they serve.
” Ridley-Thomas postponed the discussion and vote to Nov. 10 , saying he wanted his colleagues on the board to have more time to review the motion .
Already , there was some pushback .
“ I still stand by my belief that the sheriff is elected , ” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger , who opposes the motion .
“ And that , in 2022 , unless there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to that , that that ’ s where the voters have a right .
”

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors is investigating what it would take to remove Sheriff Alex Villanueva from his position.
The bitter discord among Los Angeles County’s top elected leaders ramped up a notch this week with a push by two supervisors to explore what it would take to remove Sheriff Alex Villanueva from his elected position.
The Board of Supervisors’ vote on the matter was postponed by two weeks. Questions remain, though, about whether the board has the power to force Villanueva out or whether the proposal is more of a symbolic gesture to pressure him as he faces mounting calls to resign.
The answers are complicated, and Villanueva has suggested he would challenge any effort to remove him.
Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas — who wrote the proposal in one of his last moves before next week’s election, in which he’s running for a City Council seat after serving the maximum 12 years on the board — said it’s still worth at least looking into.
Advertisement
“We will not be able to do that if we don’t try,” he told The Times. Ridley-Thomas and Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, who co-wrote the motion, have criticized Villanueva’s failure to cooperate with the Office of Inspector General, which oversees the Sheriff’s Department, and echoed calls for his resignation.
“It has become increasingly clear that the sheriff’s blatant disregard for transparency and accountability requires a more forceful response,” their motion says.
Villanueva has said that he has no plans to quit and that supervisors looking to undo the results of a lawful election could trigger a legal battle that would cost millions of dollars.
“Let’s set aside the past and work out our differences,” he told the board Tuesday, offering a more conciliatory tone than usual. He blamed the chief executive office, though, for not funding positions to comply with an “avalanche” of records requests under a new transparency law that made some internal police records public.
“Transparency and accountability do not come cheap,” he said.
Legal and governance experts said there are limited options in removing an elected officer short of a recall or their committing a crime.
“There are plenty of checks and balances already in place,” said former L.A. County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley. “The only way that some of these harebrained ideas will ever reach fruition is if the [state] Constitution is changed. … If they change the Constitution, that would impact every single one of California’s 58 elected sheriffs.”
Advertisement
“When you’re elected, it means something,” said Frank V. Zerunyan, a professor on the practice of governance at USC. Villanueva “was elected — he’s using the Constitution to his favor, rightfully so, to be honest. I can’t blame him for saying what he’s saying.”
But there is case law as well as an old state attorney general opinion that suggests there’s a way to remove an elected sheriff in California, said Mario Mainero, a law professor at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law.
In 2001, then-California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer concluded that a county charter may grant the board of supervisors the authority to remove the sheriff, district attorney or other county officer for cause with a four-fifths vote.
The opinion was cited by a California appeals court in 2005 when it declared constitutional an ordinance approved by the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors that allowed them to remove a sheriff for certain reasons — including flagrant or repeated neglect of duties, misappropriation of public property, violation of any law related to the performance of the official’s job duties or willfully falsifying an official document — with a four-fifths vote.
“It makes it very clear that the board then has the power to remove, but is also clear they cannot remove for performing law enforcement functions,” Mainero said. “They cannot be doing this because they have a disagreement with the manner of performing law enforcement functions. They’re going to have to do it based on something other than that.”
A sheriff’s refusal to comply with subpoenas or oversight laws could be justification for his removal, Mainero said. Villanueva, however, would have to argue those actions interfered with his law enforcement duties.
“He’s got to make that argument, because that’s his only argument,” Mainero said. “But it doesn’t mean it’s true, and it doesn’t mean it’s not true.”
A judge would have to decide “whether or not that’s a pretext by him or whether this really is an interference,” Mainero said.
In San Bernardino County, the Board of Supervisors never actually tried to remove the sheriff, said county spokesman David Wert. That case, he said, began in 2002 when officials noticed a provision on the county’s charter that gave the board the power to do so without any standards or process, “leaving it vulnerable for abuse.”
So the board created the ordinance, which then-Sheriff Gary Penrod challenged, arguing that it conflicted with the Peace Officers Bill of Rights and his independence under state law, Wert said. The appellate court didn’t weigh in on the Bill of Rights argument in its 2005 decision.
The ordinance says that the removal of an elected county officer “is an extraordinary act and should occur in only the most egregious of circumstances and only when the interests of the citizens of the county cannot be reasonably served by any other means. These circumstances include the exposure of the county, or its employees, to irreparable harm.”
The proposal in Los Angeles County drew criticism from Ron Hernandez, president of the Assn. of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, the union that represents rank-and-file deputies.
“As far as the board motion, I think they are blinded by their frustration and focused on the personality conflict instead of the safety of their communities,” he said. “Any elected body who is focused on finding a way to override the voters has lost touch with the constituents they serve.”
Ridley-Thomas postponed the discussion and vote to Nov. 10, saying he wanted his colleagues on the board to have more time to review the motion. Already, there was some pushback.
“I still stand by my belief that the sheriff is elected,” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who opposes the motion. “And that, in 2022, unless there’s a community-led effort to vacate that seat prior to that, that that’s where the voters have a right.”
Times staff writer Jaclyn Cosgrove contributed to this report.


latimes--2020-10-29--'Normal' unlikely to come before 2022 as COVID-19 surges unchecked, Fauci says

It may be 2022 before a coronavirus-weary world begins to feel a greater sense of normality , says the nation ’ s top infectious disease expert , Dr. Anthony Fauci .
If the U.S. can get a substantial proportion of residents vaccinated by around mid-2021 , “ I think it will be easily by the end of 2021 — and perhaps even into the next year — before we start having some semblance of normality , ” Fauci said in candid comments during an online discussion hosted by an Australian university this week .
As a result , it may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hallmarks of normalcy without risking a super-spreading event , one in which a large number of people are infected , Fauci told the University of Melbourne .
Restaurants might not be able to return to full capacity , and professional sports venues may not be able to allow spectators , until late 2021 or early 2022 , he said .
Fauci said he could envision people , in masks , returning to theaters at a reduced capacity around mid-2021 .
But returning to maximum capacity in theaters without requiring masks likely won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ” from now .
Our sense of what ’ s normal may also change , Fauci said .
He said he believed wearing masks would continue to be common , as it has been in many parts of Asia for decades preceding this COVID-19 pandemic .
Fauci warned that the U.S. was heading in the wrong direction , with more than 227,000 deaths among people with COVID-19 and , on a recent day this week , 83,000 new coronavirus infections reported in a single day .
Fauci previously said the U.S. should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a day as it headed into winter .
“ That is very troubling , ” Fauci said .
“ We ’ ve got to do better than that.
” Fauci said the differing pandemic control strategies implemented by different states in the U.S. made managing the pandemic more difficult .
“ We saw that very clearly when we were trying to open up the economy again , ” Fauci said , referring to guidelines he and Dr. Deborah Birx , the White House coronavirus response coordinator , helped develop on when and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ That would have been nice if all the states did that the same way , ” Fauci said .
Instead , “ it was like a free-for-all .
There was some states that didn ’ t even pay attention .
Some states jumped over one benchmark to the other .
And some states tried to do it well , but yet when you looked at the TV screen , you ’ d see people crowded at bars , with no masks , just essentially causing super-spreading ” despite federal guidelines for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and avoiding crowded settings .
“ If everybody had done that uniformly , ” Fauci said , “ I don ’ t think we would be in the position we ’ re in right now.
” A number of experts , including Fauci , are increasingly talking about the need for some type of mask mandate that ’ s national in scope .
Dr. Scott Gottlieb , who served as the head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration under the Trump administration until 2019 , says it ’ s time for “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” as he wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal .
Fauci has told CNN that “ if people are not wearing masks , then maybe we should be mandating it.
” In the Australian city of Melbourne , residents virtually universally wear masks , according to Dr. Sharon Lewin , director of the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity at the University of Melbourne , who also spoke on the panel discussion .
“ We have universal mask wearing in Melbourne because you ’ re fined $ 1,000 if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Lewin said .
“ If you walk on the streets of Melbourne , 99.9 % of people are wearing masks , and we did it by fining people.
” Fauci said he wished the widespread mentality of universal masking could be transplanted to the U.S. , where wearing masks is perceived as a political statement in some communities and wearers are sometimes ridiculed — “ which is so painful to me as a physician , a scientist and a public health person to see such divisiveness centered around a public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fauci said in his talk with the University of Melbourne , what will be really important in dealing with the coronavirus in the long run will be developing antiviral drugs that can be used to treat those who test positive for the virus .
Fauci said development of antiviral drugs that allowed doctors to “ only have to treat them literally for a few days ” could “ take away the fear and dread of this particular disease.
” There are still some unknowns about the effects of COVID-19 .
Scientists still don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how durable immunity is among people who have survived an infection , and whether people can be reinfected by this coronavirus repeatedly , as can occur with common cold viruses .
If people lose immunity fairly quickly after recovering from the coronavirus infection , “ we ’ re going to have a very difficult time over the next few years.
” “ If somebody ’ s antibody response ... diminishes rapidly — so that after a year or so , they ’ re still susceptible to the same virus that they had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a real problem , ” Fauci said .
“ That would really be a very , very difficult situation to have a potentially deadly disease that you can continue to have year after year.
” Another unknown is the long-term effects of coronavirus infections among survivors .
There ’ s increasing worry about so-called “ long haulers.
” These are COVID-19 survivors “ who recover virologically , ” Fauci said , “ but have a rather substantial persistence of almost debilitating symptoms : shortness of breath , muscle aches , dysautonomia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such long-lasting symptoms have been found in some patients who were only moderately sick with COVID-19 and didn ’ t need hospitalization , as well as among some patients who required intensive care treatment .
This group of people may end up being survivors who “ get infected but they ’ re not necessarily going to be fine .
They may have lingering issues , symptomatically and otherwise , or it may lead to secondary issues later on.
” He cited a study in the journal JAMA Cardiology that found that 60 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had inflammatory disease of the heart .
“ Now , that may be irrelevant and it will just clear itself up with no problem , ” Fauci said .
“ But I don ’ t know that right now.
” Will it mean that many COVID-19 survivors may be more prone to long-lasting complications of the heart , such as cardiomyopathy or arrhythmia ?
“ I don ’ t know that , ” Fauci said .
“ I hope it ’ s going to be an inconsequential finding , but these are things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

Coit Tower is seen in the background as a man and woman walk along a San Francisco street.
It may be 2022 before a coronavirus-weary world begins to feel a greater sense of normality, says the nation’s top infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
If the U.S. can get a substantial proportion of residents vaccinated by around mid-2021, “I think it will be easily by the end of 2021 — and perhaps even into the next year — before we start having some semblance of normality,” Fauci said in candid comments during an online discussion hosted by an Australian university this week.
As a result, it may not be possible to achieve some longed-for hallmarks of normalcy without risking a super-spreading event, one in which a large number of people are infected, Fauci told the University of Melbourne.
Advertisement
Restaurants might not be able to return to full capacity, and professional sports venues may not be able to allow spectators, until late 2021 or early 2022, he said.
Fauci said he could envision people, in masks, returning to theaters at a reduced capacity around mid-2021. But returning to maximum capacity in theaters without requiring masks likely won’t occur until “well over a year” from now.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, shown at an appearance before a Senate committee in September, says there are still troubling unknowns about the coronavirus. (Graeme Jennings / Pool)
Our sense of what’s normal may also change, Fauci said. He said he believed wearing masks would continue to be common, as it has been in many parts of Asia for decades preceding this COVID-19 pandemic.
Fauci warned that the U.S. was heading in the wrong direction, with more than 227,000 deaths among people with COVID-19 and, on a recent day this week, 83,000 new coronavirus infections reported in a single day. Fauci previously said the U.S. should aim for fewer than 10,000 new cases a day as it headed into winter.
“That is very troubling,” Fauci said. “We’ve got to do better than that.”
Advertisement
Fauci said the differing pandemic control strategies implemented by different states in the U.S. made managing the pandemic more difficult.
“We saw that very clearly when we were trying to open up the economy again,” Fauci said, referring to guidelines he and Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus response coordinator, helped develop on when and to what extent regions could reopen the economy.
“That would have been nice if all the states did that the same way,” Fauci said. Instead, “it was like a free-for-all. There was some states that didn’t even pay attention. Some states jumped over one benchmark to the other. And some states tried to do it well, but yet when you looked at the TV screen, you’d see people crowded at bars, with no masks, just essentially causing super-spreading” despite federal guidelines for wearing masks, keeping physically distant, and avoiding crowded settings.
“If everybody had done that uniformly,” Fauci said, “I don’t think we would be in the position we’re in right now.”
A number of experts, including Fauci, are increasingly talking about the need for some type of mask mandate that’s national in scope. Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who served as the head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration under the Trump administration until 2019, says it’s time for “limited and temporary national mask mandate,” as he wrote in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. Fauci has told CNN that “if people are not wearing masks, then maybe we should be mandating it.”
In the Australian city of Melbourne, residents virtually universally wear masks, according to Dr. Sharon Lewin, director of the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity at the University of Melbourne, who also spoke on the panel discussion.
“We have universal mask wearing in Melbourne because you’re fined $1,000 if you’re outside not wearing them,” Lewin said. “If you walk on the streets of Melbourne, 99.9% of people are wearing masks, and we did it by fining people.”
Fauci said he wished the widespread mentality of universal masking could be transplanted to the U.S., where wearing masks is perceived as a political statement in some communities and wearers are sometimes ridiculed — “which is so painful to me as a physician, a scientist and a public health person to see such divisiveness centered around a public health issue.”
Apart from a vaccine, Fauci said in his talk with the University of Melbourne, what will be really important in dealing with the coronavirus in the long run will be developing antiviral drugs that can be used to treat those who test positive for the virus.
Fauci said development of antiviral drugs that allowed doctors to “only have to treat them literally for a few days” could “take away the fear and dread of this particular disease.”
There are still some unknowns about the effects of COVID-19.
Scientists still don’t know, Fauci said, how durable immunity is among people who have survived an infection, and whether people can be reinfected by this coronavirus repeatedly, as can occur with common cold viruses.
If people lose immunity fairly quickly after recovering from the coronavirus infection, “we’re going to have a very difficult time over the next few years.”
“If somebody’s antibody response ... diminishes rapidly — so that after a year or so, they’re still susceptible to the same virus that they had a year previously — that’s going to be a real problem,” Fauci said. “That would really be a very, very difficult situation to have a potentially deadly disease that you can continue to have year after year.”
Another unknown is the long-term effects of coronavirus infections among survivors.
There’s increasing worry about so-called “long haulers.” These are COVID-19 survivors “who recover virologically,” Fauci said, “but have a rather substantial persistence of almost debilitating symptoms: shortness of breath, muscle aches, dysautonomia, memory losses, difficulty concentrating.”
Such long-lasting symptoms have been found in some patients who were only moderately sick with COVID-19 and didn’t need hospitalization, as well as among some patients who required intensive care treatment.
This group of people may end up being survivors who “get infected but they’re not necessarily going to be fine. They may have lingering issues, symptomatically and otherwise, or it may lead to secondary issues later on.”
He cited a study in the journal JAMA Cardiology that found that 60% of patients who had recovered from COVID-19 had inflammatory disease of the heart. “Now, that may be irrelevant and it will just clear itself up with no problem,” Fauci said. “But I don’t know that right now.”
Will it mean that many COVID-19 survivors may be more prone to long-lasting complications of the heart, such as cardiomyopathy or arrhythmia? “I don’t know that,” Fauci said. “I hope it’s going to be an inconsequential finding, but these are things that ... I wish I knew.”


latimes--2020-10-29--Firefighters rescue barn owl whose wings were singed by Silverado fire

A barn owl is “ safe and sound ” after losing most of his feathers to the Silverado fire ’ s flames .
Firefighters with the Orange County Fire Authority first spotted the bird while battling the Irvine blaze , which has burned 13,390 acres since igniting Monday morning .
As of Thursday morning , the fire was 40 % contained .
The authority shared a video of the owl ’ s rescue Wednesday .
The animal appeared unable to move while firefighters wrapped it in yellow fire gear .
“ We ’ ll get you some help , buddy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be heard saying .
The firefighters alerted animal control officers , who later transferred the owl to Serrano Animal and Bird Hospital in Lake Forest .
“ This is our first victim of the Silverado Canyon Fires , ” the hospital said in a post on Facebook .
“ After an exam by our doctors , it was determined that most of his injuries are burned feathers .
We are not sure how bad his smoke inhalation damage is.
” The owl will remain at the hospital until it molts and grows new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the facility said .
After that , the bird will be released .
The Silverado fire is one of two wildfires burning in Orange County .
Two firefighters were badly burned over half their bodies during the firefight and remain in critical condition , authorities said .
The other Orange County blaze — the Blue Ridge fire — also ignited Monday and burned a path toward Yorba Linda .
It has charred 14,334 acres and was 30 % contained as of Thursday , authority spokesman Daniel Solis said .
All evacuation orders related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were

The bird is recuperating at an animal hospital, where it must remain until it grows new feathers.
A barn owl is “safe and sound” after losing most of his feathers to the Silverado fire’s flames.
Firefighters with the Orange County Fire Authority first spotted the bird while battling the Irvine blaze, which has burned 13,390 acres since igniting Monday morning. As of Thursday morning, the fire was 40% contained.
The authority shared a video of the owl’s rescue Wednesday. The animal appeared unable to move while firefighters wrapped it in yellow fire gear.
Advertisement
“We’ll get you some help, buddy,” one of the firefighters can be heard saying.
Earlier this evening one of our crews on a brush rig rescued a barn owl from the flames of the #SilveradoFire. He’s safe and sound and currently with animal control. pic.twitter.com/L7VycEx3qd — OCFA PIO (@OCFA_PIO) October 28, 2020
The firefighters alerted animal control officers, who later transferred the owl to Serrano Animal and Bird Hospital in Lake Forest.
“This is our first victim of the Silverado Canyon Fires,” the hospital said in a post on Facebook. “After an exam by our doctors, it was determined that most of his injuries are burned feathers. We are not sure how bad his smoke inhalation damage is.”
The owl will remain at the hospital until it molts and grows new feathers, which could take months, the facility said. After that, the bird will be released.
Advertisement
The Silverado fire is one of two wildfires burning in Orange County. Two firefighters were badly burned over half their bodies during the firefight and remain in critical condition, authorities said.
The other Orange County blaze — the Blue Ridge fire — also ignited Monday and burned a path toward Yorba Linda. It has charred 14,334 acres and was 30% contained as of Thursday, authority spokesman Daniel Solis said.


latimes--2020-10-29--People who partied after Dodgers, Lakers victories need to get coronavirus test, mayor says

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti is urging anyone who congregated to celebrate the Lakers or Dodgers championship wins to get tested for the coronavirus .
“ For those who went to the streets to celebrate … and were around strangers in an unsafe environment , please get tested and stay isolated for 14 days per the county ’ s Department of Public Health advice , ” he said Wednesday .
Thousands took to the streets Tuesday after the Dodgers won the World Series — despite pleadings from health officials to stay home .
Officials had urged Dodger fans to avoid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the hometown team and when celebrating their win .
have blamed gatherings related to the Lakers ’ and Dodgers ’ championship season for spreading the virus and preventing the county from reopening more quickly .
“ Gatherings in large crowds to watch games indoors , people aren ’ t wearing their face coverings , people are yelling a lot — that ’ s just not sensible , ” Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said Monday .
In four Southern California counties — Imperial , San Bernardino , Riverside and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new daily infections per 100,000 residents over the past week ranked among the top five statewide , according to .
Compared to the prior week , new cases in Los Angeles County jumped from an average of 63.4 for every 100,000 residents to 111.3 .
The average case rate climbed from 77.5 to 140.3 in San Bernardino and from 94.4 to 111.5 in Riverside , while in Imperial new cases soared from an average of 141.5 per 100,000 residents to 225.8 .
“ We are seeing increased disease in the community , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday .
“ This is consistent with what other areas of the country are seeing , and we are fortunate that we ’ re not seeing it to the level that many others are .
”

Fans celebrate in downtown Los Angeles after the Dodgers won the World Series. Public officials are asking people who participated in large Lakers or Dodgers gatherings to get tested for the coronavirus.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti is urging anyone who congregated to celebrate the Lakers or Dodgers championship wins to get tested for the coronavirus.
“For those who went to the streets to celebrate … and were around strangers in an unsafe environment, please get tested and stay isolated for 14 days per the county’s Department of Public Health advice,” he said Wednesday.
Thousands took to the streets Tuesday after the Dodgers won the World Series — despite pleadings from health officials to stay home.
Officials had urged Dodger fans to avoid crowds and practice social distancing while cheering on the hometown team and when celebrating their win. L.A. County health authorities have blamed gatherings related to the Lakers’ and Dodgers’ championship season for spreading the virus and preventing the county from reopening more quickly.
Advertisement
“Gatherings in large crowds to watch games indoors, people aren’t wearing their face coverings, people are yelling a lot — that’s just not sensible,” Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said Monday.
California Southern California counties see surge in new coronavirus cases The average numbers of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents in four counties — Imperial, San Bernardino, Riverside and Los Angeles — are currently among the highest in the state.
In four Southern California counties — Imperial, San Bernardino, Riverside and Los Angeles — the average number of new daily infections per 100,000 residents over the past week ranked among the top five statewide, according to The Times’ coronavirus tracker .
Compared to the prior week, new cases in Los Angeles County jumped from an average of 63.4 for every 100,000 residents to 111.3. The average case rate climbed from 77.5 to 140.3 in San Bernardino and from 94.4 to 111.5 in Riverside, while in Imperial new cases soared from an average of 141.5 per 100,000 residents to 225.8.
“We are seeing increased disease in the community,” Riverside County Public Health Director Kim Saruwatari told the county Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. “This is consistent with what other areas of the country are seeing, and we are fortunate that we’re not seeing it to the level that many others are.”


latimes--2020-10-29--In the hospital? You can still vote in California and most other parts of the country

Johnathon Talamantes broke his hip in a car accident last week and had surgery five days later at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center .
His post-op recovery will keep him in the hospital beyond election day , and that was on his mind as he prepared himself for the surgery .
“ One of the first things I asked my nurse this morning was , ‘ Oh , how am I going to vote ?
’ ” Talamantes , 30 , said from his hospital bed the day before the operation .
He initially thought of asking his mom to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the home they share and bring him the mail-in ballot that he , like all registered California voters , received for this election .
But then staffers at County-USC told him about another option : They could help him get an emergency ballot so he could cast his vote without having to get out of bed .
So Talamantes told his mom to not bother .
“ I don ’ t want her coming down here , because of the COVID restrictions , ” he said .
California law protects the rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other care facilities , or confined at home .
It allows them to get help from anyone they choose — other than an employer or a union representative — so they can cast an emergency ballot .
At least 37 other states allow emergency voting for medical reasons , according to the National Conference of State Legislatures .
But practices vary .
In some states , only family members can assist hospitalized patients with voting from the hospital .
In California , New York and several other states , hospital employees and volunteers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot application .
They can pick up the ballot for the patient and deliver the completed ballot back to the election office or deposit it in an official drop box .
In North Carolina , by contrast , it is a felony for a healthcare worker to assist a patient with voting .
In 18 states , the law allows local election boards to send representatives directly to patients ’ bedsides , though six of those states have canceled that service this fall because of the COVID-19 pandemic , said Dr. Kelly Wong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonpartisan organization dedicated to increasing turnout among registered voters who find themselves unexpectedly hospitalized around election time .
The group ’ s website features an interactive map of the United States with state-by-state information on voting while in the hospital .
It also allows patients to check whether they are registered to vote .
Wong , an emergency room resident at Rhode Island Hospital in Providence , recalled that when she was a medical student working in an ER , patients who were about to be admitted to the hospital would tell her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be admitted ; I have let the dogs out , ’ or , ‘ I ’ m the sole caretaker of my grandmother.
’ ” Then during the election of 2016 , she heard , “ ‘ I can ’ t stay .
I have to go vote.
’ ” “ That really caught my attention , ” Wong said .
She did research and learned patients could vote in the hospital using an emergency ballot — something none of her co-workers knew .
“ Our patients don ’ t know this , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our job to tell them.
” Some U.S. hospitals have been assisting patients with voting in major elections for two decades or more , part of a broader shift in the healthcare industry toward civic engagement .
Community clinics register voters in their waiting rooms or at public registration drives .
In an increasing number of ERs , patients and their families are offered the chance to register .
This year , many hospitals — including County-USC— will have mobile voting units on-site , open to staff members , patients who are well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
These efforts come as healthcare plays a starring role in the nation ’ s heated political drama : COVID-19 has become a top presidential campaign issue , and the U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hear a case that could be the death knell for the Affordable Care Act .
The pandemic has made inpatient voting a challenge because of tight restrictions at hospitals and the many employees furloughed , laid off or working at home .
A significant increase in early voting and the use of mail-in ballots in many states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need help .
“ The majority of our patients , I am hoping , will have voted already , because that will alleviate the stress — for them , it ’ s one less thing to worry about , ” said Camille Camello , associate director of volunteer services at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center , which has a program to help inpatients vote .
In past elections , she said , more than 200 patients have requested ballots .
At County-USC , administrators have been trying to ensure patients know they can get help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ common spaces and staffers are handing out fliers with voting information to every patient who is admitted , said Gabriela Hernandez , the hospital ’ s director of volunteer services .
Hernandez said she and about 25 volunteers have been walking the halls of the inpatient units for the last month , asking patients if they want help voting .
Those who say yes get emergency ballot applications , which the hospital has been sending to the L.A. County registrar-recorder for verification .
The ballot applications will continue to be made available to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day .
Hernandez and her team will collect the ballots and distribute them to patients , then return them to the registrar before the 8 p.m. deadline on Nov. 3 .
Other hospitals have a more collapsed timeline .
At St. Jude Medical Center in Fullerton , hospital staffers will begin asking patients Monday if they want voting assistance and , if they do , will bring them ballots on Tuesday , said Gian Santos , manager of volunteer services at the hospital .
In the 2016 election , only about seven or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
St. Joseph Hospital in Orange plans to handle both applications and ballots on election day .
For big hospitals , inpatient voting can be a massive undertaking .
People often require assistance in multiple languages , and the hospitals frequently contract with translation services to accommodate them .
Many hospitals receive patients from numerous counties — and across state lines .
Lenox Hill Hospital in Manhattan plans to assist as many as 200 patients from nine counties in New York state and three in New Jersey , said Erin Smith , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with fellow OB nurse navigator Lisa Schavrien , is leading the effort there .
The hospital will assign one or two “ runners ” to each of the 12 county election boards , Smith said .
For her , enabling vulnerable patients to exercise their right to vote is worth the effort .
“ If we ’ re not helping them do it , how many thousands of people are not voting in elections because they were in a car accident , because they had appendicitis , because they had unexpected brain surgery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re not making it happen in the hospital , it kind of feels to me like voter suppression.
” This story was produced by KHN ( Kaiser Health News ) , which publishes California Healthline , an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation .
KHN is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente .

Johnathon Talamantes broke his hip in a car accident and needed surgery that will keep him hospitalized beyond the Nov. 3 election. The hospital helped him apply for an emergency ballot so he can vote without leaving his bed.
Johnathon Talamantes broke his hip in a car accident last week and had surgery five days later at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center.
His post-op recovery will keep him in the hospital beyond election day, and that was on his mind as he prepared himself for the surgery.
“One of the first things I asked my nurse this morning was, ‘Oh, how am I going to vote?’” Talamantes, 30, said from his hospital bed the day before the operation.
Advertisement
He initially thought of asking his mom to rummage through a pile of papers at the home they share and bring him the mail-in ballot that he, like all registered California voters, received for this election.
But then staffers at County-USC told him about another option: They could help him get an emergency ballot so he could cast his vote without having to get out of bed. So Talamantes told his mom to not bother.
“I don’t want her coming down here, because of the COVID restrictions,” he said.
California law protects the rights of voters who are in the hospital or other care facilities, or confined at home. It allows them to get help from anyone they choose — other than an employer or a union representative — so they can cast an emergency ballot.
At least 37 other states allow emergency voting for medical reasons, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But practices vary.
In some states, only family members can assist hospitalized patients with voting from the hospital.
In California, New York and several other states, hospital employees and volunteers can help a patient complete an emergency ballot application. They can pick up the ballot for the patient and deliver the completed ballot back to the election office or deposit it in an official drop box.
Advertisement
In North Carolina, by contrast, it is a felony for a healthcare worker to assist a patient with voting.
In 18 states, the law allows local election boards to send representatives directly to patients’ bedsides, though six of those states have canceled that service this fall because of the COVID-19 pandemic, said Dr. Kelly Wong, founder of Patient Voting, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to increasing turnout among registered voters who find themselves unexpectedly hospitalized around election time.
The group’s website features an interactive map of the United States with state-by-state information on voting while in the hospital. It also allows patients to check whether they are registered to vote.
Did you know that you can vote from your hospital bed if you’re a registered voter hospitalized around Election Day? Find out more at https://t.co/FCElfyxmvq pic.twitter.com/IB9OJvT54m — Kelly Wong, MD (@kellywongmd) October 19, 2020
Wong, an emergency room resident at Rhode Island Hospital in Providence, recalled that when she was a medical student working in an ER, patients who were about to be admitted to the hospital would tell her, “‘I can’t be admitted; I have let the dogs out,’ or, ‘I’m the sole caretaker of my grandmother.’” Then during the election of 2016, she heard, “‘I can’t stay. I have to go vote.’”
“That really caught my attention,” Wong said. She did research and learned patients could vote in the hospital using an emergency ballot — something none of her co-workers knew.
“Our patients don’t know this, she said. “It should be our job to tell them.”
Some U.S. hospitals have been assisting patients with voting in major elections for two decades or more, part of a broader shift in the healthcare industry toward civic engagement.
Community clinics register voters in their waiting rooms or at public registration drives. In an increasing number of ERs, patients and their families are offered the chance to register. This year, many hospitals — including County-USC— will have mobile voting units on-site, open to staff members, patients who are well enough to walk, and their families.
These efforts come as healthcare plays a starring role in the nation’s heated political drama: COVID-19 has become a top presidential campaign issue, and the U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to hear a case that could be the death knell for the Affordable Care Act.
The pandemic has made inpatient voting a challenge because of tight restrictions at hospitals and the many employees furloughed, laid off or working at home. A significant increase in early voting and the use of mail-in ballots in many states may reduce the number of patients who need help.
“The majority of our patients, I am hoping, will have voted already, because that will alleviate the stress — for them, it’s one less thing to worry about,” said Camille Camello, associate director of volunteer services at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, which has a program to help inpatients vote. In past elections, she said, more than 200 patients have requested ballots.
At County-USC, administrators have been trying to ensure patients know they can get help voting. Posters line the walls of common spaces and staffers are handing out fliers with voting information to every patient who is admitted, said Gabriela Hernandez, the hospital’s director of volunteer services.
Hernandez said she and about 25 volunteers have been walking the halls of the inpatient units for the last month, asking patients if they want help voting.
Those who say yes get emergency ballot applications, which the hospital has been sending to the L.A. County registrar-recorder for verification. The ballot applications will continue to be made available to patients up to the morning of election day.
Hernandez and her team will collect the ballots and distribute them to patients, then return them to the registrar before the 8 p.m. deadline on Nov. 3.
Other hospitals have a more collapsed timeline.
At St. Jude Medical Center in Fullerton, hospital staffers will begin asking patients Monday if they want voting assistance and, if they do, will bring them ballots on Tuesday, said Gian Santos, manager of volunteer services at the hospital. In the 2016 election, only about seven or eight patients voted that way, Santos said.
St. Joseph Hospital in Orange plans to handle both applications and ballots on election day.
For big hospitals, inpatient voting can be a massive undertaking. People often require assistance in multiple languages, and the hospitals frequently contract with translation services to accommodate them.
Many hospitals receive patients from numerous counties — and across state lines.
Lenox Hill Hospital in Manhattan plans to assist as many as 200 patients from nine counties in New York state and three in New Jersey, said Erin Smith, an obstetrical nurse navigator who, along with fellow OB nurse navigator Lisa Schavrien, is leading the effort there.
The hospital will assign one or two “runners” to each of the 12 county election boards, Smith said. For her, enabling vulnerable patients to exercise their right to vote is worth the effort.
“If we’re not helping them do it, how many thousands of people are not voting in elections because they were in a car accident, because they had appendicitis, because they had unexpected brain surgery?” Smith asked.
“If we’re not making it happen in the hospital, it kind of feels to me like voter suppression.”
This story was produced by KHN (Kaiser Health News), which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation. KHN is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.


latimes--2020-10-29--Column: Prop. 24 is an easy 'yes' to protect internet privacy in California. But I'm a 'no' on Prop.

Column: Prop. 24 is an easy 'yes' to protect internet privacy in California. But I'm a 'no' on Prop. 14

Proposition 24 is the most obscure , complex measure on Tuesday ’ s state ballot .
But it affects practically every Californian and really is quite simple .
Bottom line : It would attempt to protect your privacy from the internet monster that profits off people ’ s personal data .
And there ’ s another low-profile measure on the ballot .
It ’ s Proposition 14 , which seeks to borrow billions — $ 5.5 billion in principal plus $ 2.3 billion in interest — to continue state funding for stem cell research .
Voters kicked in $ 3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 1 billion — to create the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine in 2004 .
Now the well is about empty and it ’ s asking for a recharge .
That ’ s a ton of money for a little-noticed agency that provides a questionable state service .
But many of the research projects have been very worthwhile .
More on Proposition 14 later .
Proposition 24 tries to control the nosy internet elves who capture your personal information and peddle it to businesses so they can target you with online ads , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Proposition 24 and the measure succeeds in helping corral the internet , it will become a model for the nation , predicts its author and bankroller , Bay Area real estate developer Alastair Mactaggart .
“ If California does this now , then the United States will have privacy one way or the other , ” Mactaggart says .
“ States will act , or the federal government will .
Either way , we ’ ll eventually have good privacy for the country… .
“ The same way that California led the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alarmed about the internet ’ s threat to personal privacy three years ago at a cocktail party .
He was gabbing with a Google engineer .
“ I asked , ‘ What ’ s this deal with all the privacy stuff ?
Is it anything to be worried about ?
’ ” Mactaggart recalls .
“ I expected him to say , ‘ No , it ’ s not a big deal.
’ “ Instead he said , ‘ If people only knew how much we know about them , they ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal data gleaned by the internet are used to market TV sets , cars , shoes — practically everything .
Internet users are targeted with ads based on their hobbies , age , children , residence , location , gender and sexual orientation .
Mactaggart created a ballot initiative to regulate internet data collecting .
Then it was the internet companies ’ turn to freak out : They threatened to spend tens of millions fighting the measure .
The two sides agreed to take advantage of a new reform that allowed an initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drop the ballot measure .
The result was passage of the nation ’ s toughest internet privacy bill , which took effect last year .
The new law gave Californians the right to know what personal information was being collected , the right to have it deleted and the right to tell companies not to sell it .
But the tech gurus found all kinds of loopholes .
Some sites claim they ’ re not selling personal information , just “ sharing ” it with partners .
The law apparently doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gen. Xavier Becerra says he ’ s too swamped with other chores — such as suing President Trump — to aggressively enforce the new state law .
Smelling blood , internet interests began trying to pick apart the law in the Legislature .
They tried to exempt vehicle ownership and insurance coverage data , for example .
Mactaggart lobbied against them and they were unsuccessful .
But he was alarmed again .
“ I told myself I can ’ t do this the rest of my life , ” he says .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ work.
” So , he and state Sen. Bob Hertzberg ( D-Van Nuys ) , who helped craft the original compromise , wrote Proposition 24 .
The ballot measure would close many of the loopholes and erect a protective wall .
The Legislature could amend it only to “ further the purpose and intent of this Act.
” So it could be strengthened but not weakened .
A separate agency would be created with a $ 10-million annual budget to enforce the law .
It would allow consumers to order internet companies not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data .
Certain “ sensitive personal information ” couldn ’ t be collected , such as data on race , health , religion , sexual orientation and precise location .
“ Amazon doesn ’ t need to know you ’ re at church , ” Mactaggart says .
Let alone which church .
He ’ s the sole campaign bankroller , anteing $ 5 million .
The tech industry has backed off and isn ’ t spending a dime .
There are some opponents , such as the American Civil Liberties Union , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong enough .
But that ’ s political reality — and why it ’ s likely to pass .
In 2004 , a primary motivation behind lopsided voter approval of a $ 3-billion stem cell bond issue was that President George W. Bush banned federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on religious grounds .
But President Obama removed the ban and President Trump never restored it .
Federal funding is available now for embryonic stem cell research .
And private interests are kicking in lots more .
So , is state money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t continue the state funding , lots of facilities would have to close their doors , ” says Kendall Klingler , the Proposition 14 spokeswoman .
These are top-of-the-line research facilities built with state bond money and partially supported with state funds .
“ We have more than 90 stem cell trials underway , ” she says .
The agency does have a record of some success : funding research that has led to treatments approved by the Food and Drug Administration for blood and bone marrow cancers , for example .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to its original hype .
It was aloof to Sacramento , and not subject to oversight by the Legislature and governor .
There ’ s been a lack of transparency .
There was also an odor of interest conflicts among agency board members who seemed to steer grants toward their own institutions , even though they recused themselves from voting .
The new bonds would cost an estimated $ 260 million annually for 30 years .
And the old bonds still won ’ t be paid off for many years .
The state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 14 is a “ no ” for now .
Maybe check back at the next election cycle .

Proposition 24 is the most obscure, complex measure on Tuesday’s state ballot. But it affects practically every Californian and really is quite simple.
Bottom line: It would attempt to protect your privacy from the internet monster that profits off people’s personal data.
For the record: An earlier version of this story said the Proposition 14 spokeswoman was Sarah Melbostad. The Proposition 14 spokeswoman is
Kendall Klingler.
And there’s another low-profile measure on the ballot. It’s Proposition 14, which seeks to borrow billions — $5.5 billion in principal plus $2.3 billion in interest — to continue state funding for stem cell research.
Advertisement
Voters kicked in $3 billion plus interest — estimated at around $1 billion — to create the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine in 2004. Now the well is about empty and it’s asking for a recharge.
That’s a ton of money for a little-noticed agency that provides a questionable state service. But many of the research projects have been very worthwhile. More on Proposition 14 later.
Proposition 24 tries to control the nosy internet elves who capture your personal information and peddle it to businesses so they can target you with online ads, among other things.
If voters approve Proposition 24 and the measure succeeds in helping corral the internet, it will become a model for the nation, predicts its author and bankroller, Bay Area real estate developer Alastair Mactaggart.
“If California does this now, then the United States will have privacy one way or the other,” Mactaggart says. “States will act, or the federal government will. Either way, we’ll eventually have good privacy for the country….
“The same way that California led the country in cleaning polluted air.”
Advertisement
Mactaggart became alarmed about the internet’s threat to personal privacy three years ago at a cocktail party. He was gabbing with a Google engineer.
Politics California Prop. 24: Consumer privacy | Election 2020 If Proposition 24 passes, it would make changes to California’s new consumer privacy law, allowing consumers new rights to limit the sharing of their personal information.
“I asked, ‘What’s this deal with all the privacy stuff? Is it anything to be worried about?’” Mactaggart recalls. “I expected him to say, ‘No, it’s not a big deal.’
“Instead he said, ‘If people only knew how much we know about them, they’d really freak out.’
“I was taken aback.”
He learned that personal data gleaned by the internet are used to market TV sets, cars, shoes — practically everything. Internet users are targeted with ads based on their hobbies, age, children, residence, location, gender and sexual orientation.
Mactaggart created a ballot initiative to regulate internet data collecting. Then it was the internet companies’ turn to freak out: They threatened to spend tens of millions fighting the measure.
The two sides agreed to take advantage of a new reform that allowed an initiative sponsor to negotiate a legislative compromise and drop the ballot measure. The result was passage of the nation’s toughest internet privacy bill, which took effect last year.
The new law gave Californians the right to know what personal information was being collected, the right to have it deleted and the right to tell companies not to sell it.
But the tech gurus found all kinds of loopholes. Some sites claim they’re not selling personal information, just “sharing” it with partners. The law apparently doesn’t forbid that.
Anyway, California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra says he’s too swamped with other chores — such as suing President Trump — to aggressively enforce the new state law.
Smelling blood, internet interests began trying to pick apart the law in the Legislature. They tried to exempt vehicle ownership and insurance coverage data, for example. Mactaggart lobbied against them and they were unsuccessful. But he was alarmed again.
“I told myself I can’t do this the rest of my life,” he says. “This isn’t going to work.”
So, he and state Sen. Bob Hertzberg (D-Van Nuys), who helped craft the original compromise, wrote Proposition 24.
Politics California Prop. 14: Stem cell research | Election 2020 If Proposition 14 passes, it would allow the state to borrow more money to continue stem cell research at the state government level.
The ballot measure would close many of the loopholes and erect a protective wall. The Legislature could amend it only to “further the purpose and intent of this Act.” So it could be strengthened but not weakened.
A separate agency would be created with a $10-million annual budget to enforce the law.
It would allow consumers to order internet companies not to sell or “share” their data.
Certain “sensitive personal information” couldn’t be collected, such as data on race, health, religion, sexual orientation and precise location.
“Amazon doesn’t need to know you’re at church,” Mactaggart says.
Let alone which church.
He’s the sole campaign bankroller, anteing $5 million. The tech industry has backed off and isn’t spending a dime.
There are some opponents, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, that think the measure isn’t strong enough. But that’s political reality — and why it’s likely to pass.
Proposition 24 is an easy “yes.”
A closer call is Proposition 14.
In 2004, a primary motivation behind lopsided voter approval of a $3-billion stem cell bond issue was that President George W. Bush banned federal funding for embryonic stem cell research on religious grounds. But President Obama removed the ban and President Trump never restored it.
Federal funding is available now for embryonic stem cell research. And private interests are kicking in lots more. So, is state money still needed?
“If we don’t continue the state funding, lots of facilities would have to close their doors,” says Kendall Klingler, the Proposition 14 spokeswoman.
These are top-of-the-line research facilities built with state bond money and partially supported with state funds.
“We have more than 90 stem cell trials underway,” she says.
The agency does have a record of some success: funding research that has led to treatments approved by the Food and Drug Administration for blood and bone marrow cancers, for example.
But the agency failed to live up to its original hype.
It was aloof to Sacramento, and not subject to oversight by the Legislature and governor. There’s been a lack of transparency.
There was also an odor of interest conflicts among agency board members who seemed to steer grants toward their own institutions, even though they recused themselves from voting.
The new bonds would cost an estimated $260 million annually for 30 years. And the old bonds still won’t be paid off for many years.
The state currently has higher spending priorities.
Proposition 14 is a “no” for now. Maybe check back at the next election cycle.


latimes--2020-10-28--Column: Racial inequity in California is real. But is Prop. 16 the answer?

California voters are being asked again whether they believe affirmative action based on race , ethnicity and gender is necessary to combat discrimination — or is itself discriminatory .
Supporters of Proposition 16 say it ’ s needed to level the playing field and to mitigate systemic racism .
They point out that Latino and Black students are underrepresented at the University of California compared with their high school graduation numbers .
And supporters argue that businesses owned by Latino , and Black people and women often get short shrift in government contracting that historically tends to favor “ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ballot measure contend that when one group is favored at the expense of another — when university slots are granted or denied because of a student ’ s race or ethnicity — that ’ s discriminatory .
Proposition 16 would repeal a bitterly fought 1996 ballot measure that banned affirmative action in public education , contracting or employment based on race , ethnicity , gender or national origin .
That measure was Proposition 209 , and the campaign was nasty .
Opponents of 209 ran TV ads equating the measure ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ robes and hoods .
Critics of 209 saw a window of opportunity to repeal it when a white Minneapolis cop killed a Black man , George Floyd , by kneeling on his neck .
That galvanized the Black Lives Matter movement and inspired the California Legislature to place Proposition 16 on next Tuesday ’ s ballot .
Systemic racism isn ’ t easily defined .
But one thing it means is that the system is stacked against many people of color from birth .
Children living in low-wealth communities attend overcrowded schools that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adequately prepare them for college .
Their teachers are young , inexperienced and anxious to move on to more affluent , better-equipped campuses .
Latino students often have language barriers .
Parents who didn ’ t go to college might be in low-paying jobs and don ’ t have the influential contacts who could help guide their children into prestigious universities .
That ’ s just for starters .
“ The language of a colorblind public policy is a political head fake , ” says Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most significant blemishes on California ’ s records is Prop .
209.
” Michele Siqueiros , president of the Campaign for College Opportunity , which fights to expand student access to public universities , says : “ We have a system that provides preferential treatment to wealthier students from top high schools .
Schools in wealthier communities have access to more resources .
“ There ’ s inequality in terms of the quality of education that students receive in California and everyplace.
” There is no question that many Black and Latino people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and inequities , whether that ’ s measured by economics or vital services such as healthcare and higher education .
Proposition 16 critics point out , however , that inequality often is complicated .
Although white and Asian people are generally better off economically than Black and Latino people , there are some white and Asian students who come from poor backgrounds and are trying to be first-generation college grads .
Would they be discriminated against if Black and Latino applicants were given preference in admittance to the University of California ?
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigrant families today going through what I went through when I first came to this country from communist China at age 10 not speaking any English , ” says Ying Ma , communications director for the No on 16 campaign .
“ At the very least I ’ d expect the state not to discriminate against me or people who look like me.
” “ Proposition 16 is just outright discrimination , ” says Betty Chu , former mayor of Monterey Park and once an attorney for the L.A. Unified School District and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s aimed at decreasing the number of Asians in the public universities and increasing the population of Latinos.
” That ’ s denied by Proposition 16 supporters , who say access should be expanded for everyone .
UC undergraduate enrollment last fall was 33 % Asian , 25 % Latino , 21 % white and 4 % Black , according to the university website .
Since 1999 , the Latino percentage has doubled from 12 % and the whites ’ fallen by nearly half from 38 % .
Asian and Black percentages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 percentage points and up 1 , respectively .
The pool of high school graduates breaks down this way : 51 % Latino , 26 % white , 13 % Asian and about 6 % Black , according to the Public Policy Institute of California .
Those numbers are troubling and point to the need to find ways to get more Latino and Black students into UC schools .
This is essential to reducing inequity and helping to generate a more diverse slate of future leaders and innovators in California .
Richard Sander @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activist in housing integration and leading opponent of Proposition 16 , notes that UC has been using affirmative action based on socioeconomics — rather than race and ethnicity — to help and recruit students from poor families and underperforming schools .
Of those students , 90 % are Black or Latino , he says .
But Siqueiros asks : “ If we ’ re doing all these other things to try to get at race , why not just directly use race ” in affirmative action ?
Proposition 16 is supported by two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Commerce and the California Business Roundtable .
“ Prop .
16 will help allow small , minority and women-owned businesses better access to capital , especially in applying for and receiving important state contracts , ” Roundtable Chairman Brett Bittel says .
Gilbert R. Vasquez , former chairman of the Los Angeles Latino Chamber of Commerce and partner in a large minority-owned CPA firm , says , “ There ’ s a constant barrier for ethnic minorities and women ” who seek government contracts .
Government bureaucrats who award contracts “ don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ ve been doing business primarily with white-owned firms , ” he says .
“ They need to bring in new vendors , not just go to the people they know .
We ’ re just sort of afterthoughts.
” Independent polling shows Proposition 16 headed for defeat .
But it ’ s supported by Democrats , and they ’ re apparently voting in record numbers .
So , a surprise outcome is conceivable .
I ’ m a “ no ” vote .
I can ’ t bring myself to erase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the state shall not discriminate against , or grant preferential treatment ... on the basis of race , sex , color , ethnicity or national origin… ” California has a long history of doing just the opposite .
And clearly Black and Latino students need heftier boosts .
UC should significantly step up its program — with a lot more state money from Sacramento — of helping high school students based on their socioeconomic status .
More tutoring and recruiting of students desiring to become the first of their families to attend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Legislature should make socioeconomic diversity in our public universities a top priority .
California ’ s governors and legislators still haven ’ t fulfilled their decades-long promise of significantly improving inner-city schools .
That would help disadvantaged kids of all races and ethnicities , and particularly Latino and Black students .
If beefed-up schools and socioeconomic-based affirmative action don ’ t get more Latino and Black students into the UC system , then maybe we ’ ll need to rethink racial and ethnic preferences .
And go to the voters with another @ @ @

California voters are being asked again whether they believe affirmative action based on race, ethnicity and gender is necessary to combat discrimination — or is itself discriminatory.
Supporters of Proposition 16 say it’s needed to level the playing field and to mitigate systemic racism.
They point out that Latino and Black students are underrepresented at the University of California compared with their high school graduation numbers.
Advertisement
And supporters argue that businesses owned by Latino, and Black people and women often get short shrift in government contracting that historically tends to favor “the old boys’ network.”
Opponents of the ballot measure contend that when one group is favored at the expense of another — when university slots are granted or denied because of a student’s race or ethnicity — that’s discriminatory.
Proposition 16 would repeal a bitterly fought 1996 ballot measure that banned affirmative action in public education, contracting or employment based on race, ethnicity, gender or national origin.
That measure was Proposition 209, and the campaign was nasty. Opponents of 209 ran TV ads equating the measure’s backers with Ku Klux Klansmen in white robes and hoods.
Critics of 209 saw a window of opportunity to repeal it when a white Minneapolis cop killed a Black man, George Floyd, by kneeling on his neck. That galvanized the Black Lives Matter movement and inspired the California Legislature to place Proposition 16 on next Tuesday’s ballot.
Systemic racism isn’t easily defined. But one thing it means is that the system is stacked against many people of color from birth.
Children living in low-wealth communities attend overcrowded schools that don’t have the resources to adequately prepare them for college. Their teachers are young, inexperienced and anxious to move on to more affluent, better-equipped campuses. Latino students often have language barriers.
Advertisement
Parents who didn’t go to college might be in low-paying jobs and don’t have the influential contacts who could help guide their children into prestigious universities. That’s just for starters.
“The language of a colorblind public policy is a political head fake,” says Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, who is Black. “One of the most significant blemishes on California’s records is Prop. 209.”
Michele Siqueiros, president of the Campaign for College Opportunity, which fights to expand student access to public universities, says: “We have a system that provides preferential treatment to wealthier students from top high schools. Schools in wealthier communities have access to more resources.
“There’s inequality in terms of the quality of education that students receive in California and everyplace.”
There is no question that many Black and Latino people deal with an outsized share of disadvantages and inequities, whether that’s measured by economics or vital services such as healthcare and higher education.
Proposition 16 critics point out, however, that inequality often is complicated. Although white and Asian people are generally better off economically than Black and Latino people, there are some white and Asian students who come from poor backgrounds and are trying to be first-generation college grads. Would they be discriminated against if Black and Latino applicants were given preference in admittance to the University of California?
“There are lots of poor kids from immigrant families today going through what I went through when I first came to this country from communist China at age 10 not speaking any English,” says Ying Ma, communications director for the No on 16 campaign.
“At the very least I’d expect the state not to discriminate against me or people who look like me.”
“Proposition 16 is just outright discrimination,” says Betty Chu, former mayor of Monterey Park and once an attorney for the L.A. Unified School District and L.A. Community College District.
“It’s aimed at decreasing the number of Asians in the public universities and increasing the population of Latinos.”
That’s denied by Proposition 16 supporters, who say access should be expanded for everyone.
UC undergraduate enrollment last fall was 33% Asian, 25% Latino, 21% white and 4% Black, according to the university website. Since 1999, the Latino percentage has doubled from 12% and the whites’ fallen by nearly half from 38%. Asian and Black percentages didn’t change much — down 2 percentage points and up 1, respectively.
The pool of high school graduates breaks down this way: 51% Latino, 26% white, 13% Asian and about 6% Black, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
Those numbers are troubling and point to the need to find ways to get more Latino and Black students into UC schools. This is essential to reducing inequity and helping to generate a more diverse slate of future leaders and innovators in California.
Richard Sander, a UCLA law professor, longtime activist in housing integration and leading opponent of Proposition 16, notes that UC has been using affirmative action based on socioeconomics — rather than race and ethnicity — to help and recruit students from poor families and underperforming schools. Of those students, 90% are Black or Latino, he says.
But Siqueiros asks: “If we’re doing all these other things to try to get at race, why not just directly use race” in affirmative action?
Proposition 16 is supported by two major business groups — the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Business Roundtable.
“Prop. 16 will help allow small, minority and women-owned businesses better access to capital, especially in applying for and receiving important state contracts,” Roundtable Chairman Brett Bittel says .
Gilbert R. Vasquez, former chairman of the Los Angeles Latino Chamber of Commerce and partner in a large minority-owned CPA firm, says, “There’s a constant barrier for ethnic minorities and women” who seek government contracts.
Government bureaucrats who award contracts “don’t want to change, and they’ve been doing business primarily with white-owned firms,” he says. “They need to bring in new vendors, not just go to the people they know. We’re just sort of afterthoughts.”
Independent polling shows Proposition 16 headed for defeat. But it’s supported by Democrats, and they’re apparently voting in record numbers. So, a surprise outcome is conceivable.
I’m a “no” vote. I can’t bring myself to erase from the California Constitution language that decrees “the state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment ... on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin…”
California has a long history of doing just the opposite.
And clearly Black and Latino students need heftier boosts.
UC should significantly step up its program — with a lot more state money from Sacramento — of helping high school students based on their socioeconomic status. More tutoring and recruiting of students desiring to become the first of their families to attend college.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature should make socioeconomic diversity in our public universities a top priority.
California’s governors and legislators still haven’t fulfilled their decades-long promise of significantly improving inner-city schools. That would help disadvantaged kids of all races and ethnicities, and particularly Latino and Black students.
If beefed-up schools and socioeconomic-based affirmative action don’t get more Latino and Black students into the UC system, then maybe we’ll need to rethink racial and ethnic preferences. And go to the voters with another Proposition 16.