REGARDING DOGS AT THE FARMERS MARKET:
Circling the News joked on February 27, that the latest dog park was the Palisades Farmers Market, because so many dogs are with their owners on Sunday.
A reader sent a copy of the California Health and Safety Code 114259.5, which stipulates that live animals aren’t allowed in Certified Farmers’ Markets and permitted food facilities, with the exception of service animals. Fraudulently misrepresenting service animals is a misdemeanor (Ca. Penal Code 365.7).
Another reader wrote: “Consider the Palisades Farmers Market as a grocery store. The market has health department ‘No Dogs’ signs are at all entry points but they are ignored. I have nearly tripped over dogs in some of the ‘cozy’ booths.”
A third reader wrote “The Health code is posted at the market stating that only service animals are allowed, licensed or certified or some such term. The signs are generally ignored, sadly.”
SOCAL GAS WANTS TO RAISE RATES:
A reader wrote: “We just received a notice that SoCalGas is asking for another price increase. This is a despicable bunch of crooks that have no shame. The LA Times needs to send its team of reporters out and expose this group like they did at LADWP several years ago.”
Another wrote that: We have lived in our home for 22 years and my monthly SoCalGas bill is $300 to $450 per month, of course, depending on the season. My bill for the month of January 2023 was over $1,800. I am waiting for the February bill to arrive. Something must be done. An elected official, whether is it is City, County or State should start a thorough investigation because homeowners are being ripped off.”
(Editor’s note: SoCal Gas and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) are inviting residents to participate in a Public Participation Hearing, about SoCalGas’ 2024 General Rate Case (GRC) application.
At this public forum, one can oppose the rate increase through the CPUC’s Administrative Law Judge.
There will be two virtual hearings: the first will be held at 2 p.m. March 6, call (800)857-1917 Passcode: 1767567# or via the internet, Webcast: adminmonitor.com/ca/cpuc.
The second hearing will be at 6 p.m. on March 15, call (800)-857-1917 Passcode: 1767567# Webcast: adminmonitor.com/ca/cpuc.)
CASTELLAMMARE RESIDENTS TRAPPED:
A reader wrote: “This tree was down on Tramonto this last Friday leaving those of us in Castellammare with only the exit to PCH on Porto Marina… The tree has now been moved to one lane allowing us one lane to come and go. The stop lights on PCH at Porto Marina, Sunset and Los Liones are out.
“Getting my husband to the hospital yesterday was stressful. Coming home from Kaiser I needed to put gas in my car, but with the power out at the gas stations I couldn’t pump gas.
“Even though this outage at PCH may not have anything to do with DWP, I sincerely hope with the other power outages happening that DWP will finally be allowed to build its substation.”
LAST TO LIFT COVID EMERGENCY?
Los Angeles lifted its Covid Emergency on February 1, California State lifted its Covid Emergency on February 28, today, and President Biden plans to end the public health emergency on May 11.
L.A. County was going to vote today on whether it should end its state of emergency. County Supervisor Janice Hahn’s motion, if approved by the board, would end the proclamation of a local emergency and the proclamation of a local health emergency on March 31.
A reader wrote “L.A. County needs to left its state of emergency. It’s been three years. Their draconian policies have harmed our children beyond words. It needs to end now.”
One of the mandates that would be lifted by the County would be a requirement that people who are exposed to COVID-19 wear a mask for 10 days. County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said public health officials will be reviewing data to determine whether that requirement will continue under a revised health order.
The Cochrane Library, in a review looked at 78 randomized controlled trials to determine whether “physical interventions” — including face masks and hand-washing — lessened the spread of respiratory viruses. (The Cochrane Library is global independent network of researchers, professionals, patients, carers and people interested in health.)
The review (“Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses”) was published in January 2023 and included 610,872 participants. Six of the new trials were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The authors wrote “We included 12 trials (10 cluster‐RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks.”
At the end of the review, there is a “Plain Language Summary.”
Medical or surgical masks
Ten studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask in the community studies only, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu‐like illness/COVID‐like illness (9 studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 13,919 people).
Four studies were with healthcare workers, and one small study was in the community. Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu‐like illness (5 studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people).
The authors of the study emphasized that there are research gaps that need to be addressed regarding masking, and called the research pressing because of the “polarizing opinions around the world, and the increasing concerns over widespread microplastic pollution from the discarding of masks.”
“The type of fabric and weave used in the face mask is an equally pressing concern, given that surgical masks with their cotton‐polypropylene fabric appear to be effective in the healthcare setting, but there are questions about the effectiveness of simple cotton masks.
“In addition, although the use of medical/surgical masks versus N95 respirators demonstrates no differences in clinical effectiveness to date, their use needs to be further studied within the context of a well‐designed RCT in the setting of COVID‐19, and with concomitant measurement of harms, which to date have been poorly studied.”