Overkill or smart? San Fran marathoners will have to wear masks for the 6.7 miles that go through National Park Service land

rojo wrote:

This to me seems like overkill and a classic case of govt bureacracy not adapting.

God people are stupid

It’s simple: either follow the rules or pick yourself up by your bootstraps and FIND A DIFFERENT RACE

Well, sure it is, but unless 90% of the field threatens to drop out and not make the trip to the race, they're not going to double back on it.

Masks outdoors have always been nothing but theatrics. Completely useless.

This event is a circus and anyone who participates is a clown.

This is absolutely stupid.

We have been at this virus for over 2 years and there is absolutely no science that will say that this virus spreads at all outside.

“We’ve known for a year that outdoor infections are extremely rare,” Ashish Jha, dean of Brown University’s School of Public Health, April, 2021.

Practically impossible to transmit the virus outside. The way to get around the mask requirement would be to reroute the course so the runners stay off Federal property. Highly unlikely given that parts of all 4 races go through the Golden Gate Recreation Area.

One of the first documented outbreaks of Delta in my areas was at a big outdoor wedding where some family members flew in from India to attend (all guest were vaxed, but there were a bunch of breakthrough cases). Most of the data on outdoor transmission is based on Alpha. We do not know yet whether Delta's increased transmissibility means that outdoor transmission is more likely or remains as remote as Alpha.

It is certainly a possibility that people bunched up and breathing hard during a marathon could increase the risk of transmitting COVID. Until we have better data on Delta transmission outdoors, it is not unreasonable to err on the side of caution for once.

You should not even have to ask. Obviously it is overkill, but there may be half of the runners in that race that signed up solely for the public opportunity to virtue signal. In the latter case it is just part of the event.

rojo wrote:

This to me seems like overkill and a clcassic case of govt bureacracy not adapting.

Neither. it's a classic case of taking the path of least resistance. NPS rules (which you say are not objectionable) call for masks on part of the course. So there are 3 options:

A) NPS issues a waiver of mask rules for this event

B) SF Marathon reroutes the course (don't cross the bridge)

C) SF Marathon just goes with it

C is by far the easiest, so that's what happened. Organizers will have to pay lip service to the rules with signs and announcements, but aren't going to dedicate any resources to enforcement. Organizers explicitly said runners won't be pulled of course, but "could" be disqualified. (They won't be, but they "could" be.)

It'll be awkward when race photos show that none of the leaders are wearing masks, but very few people are going to care.

They should wear helmets and kneepads too.

You know, just in case.

rojo wrote:

This to me seems like overkill and a clcassic case of govt bureacracy not adapting. Last month, the National Park Service announced new rules requiring masking indoors and at "crowded outdoor spaces". Fair enough. I've got no problem with that. I'm currently at jury duty wearing a K95 mask.

And this week's marathon goes through the National Park Service for many miles with 6.7 of them being described as crowded so they are going to make them wear masks at that point. I think this is overkill. Why? Because the race already requires a negative Covid-19 test or vaccination. The vast majority of the risk is already eliminated.

The National Park Service has said that race organizers are responsible for the enforcement which would result in a fine or DQ from the race.

This post made me laugh. I had visions of the virus leaving the start and finish areas where the crowding is highest and then hiding behind trees in the National Park to jump out at unsuspecting runners. The reality is that there have been zero challenge studies to determine if the virus can, in fact, be spread outdoors.

Here's what I've done. In locations where the mandate is just silly, I have a surgical mask with two of the three layers cut out. It still appears to be a mask, but it has no effect on breathing. I carry a normal mask in my pocket just in case I get into a high-risk situation or if I'm challenged for not wearing a mask.

Precious Roy wrote:

One of the first documented outbreaks of Delta in my areas was at a big outdoor wedding where some family members flew in from India to attend (all guest were vaxed, but there were a bunch of breakthrough cases). Most of the data on outdoor transmission is based on Alpha. We do not know yet whether Delta's increased transmissibility means that outdoor transmission is more likely or remains as remote as Alpha.

It is certainly a possibility that people bunched up and breathing hard during a marathon could increase the risk of transmitting COVID. Until we have better data on Delta transmission outdoors, it is not unreasonable to err on the side of caution for once.

Sure it's **possible** that the transmission was outdoors, but isn't it more likely than on the airport, in the hotel, at gatherings before and after the transmission happened. NFL games are 100% attendance, crowded as they get and we are not seeing super-spreader events as a result tracing fans in the same section etc.

I tend to side with Rojo here that the vaccine/negative test requirement is sufficient to say that masks are unnecessary here.

THEN FIND A DIFFERENT RACE

I believe this is the correct analysis.

I keeps it real wrote:

God people are stupid

Statistically speaking, yes. But there are some smart religious people out there, it isn't completely exclusive.

I keeps it real wrote:

THEN FIND A DIFFERENT RACE

Worked fine for Michael Jackson.

holterskolter2 wrote:

I keeps it real wrote:

THEN FIND A DIFFERENT RACE

Worked fine for Michael Jackson.

?

A lot of mandates evade logic. I would recommend people find another race. There are tons of races this time of year that are not on Federal Land or in California. Most people are probably at far greater risk travelling to and from the race than they are running outside (especially with a vaccine / test requirement).