My family is in New England. Massachusetts has 10x more deaths per capita than New Hampshire even though, if anything, Massachusetts has been a bit ahead in terms of closures and interventions.
Saying that New York's approach wasn't science based is absurd. The most notable screwup was the delay in school closures due to the dependence that many have on getting breakfast and lunch at school. IMO, at the time I don't think awareness that asymptomatic "super spreaders" may exist was known. (Assuming that is true, much of the data known to CDC is now classified so it's difficult to really know!)
Your argument would basically be saying at that point "China has much more cases even though they have stricter restrictions, which means restrictions don't work!"
No one who's been to NYC can miss the fact that it's one of the filthiest places in America, from the perspective of disease possibilities. Many parts simply pile their trash on the curb and there are rats are everywhere. People pack into subway cars like sardines, and there's no way to avoid droplet transmission. During my time there, I saw several people vomit in public and just walk off.
There are plenty of great things about the city, but lacking a real culture of cleanliness (e.g., Tokyo), density breeds disease.
COVID-19 is spread principally by breathing, which is unaffected by cleanliness.
And if you think people are packed into subway cars in New York... have you been to Tokyo?
I'm not saying New York is a paragon of cleanliness, but you will have to show some scientific evidence that curbside trash pickup or the occasional subway rat has anything to do with the prevalence of modern-day diseases. Because they simply do not as common knowledge suggests.
Modern diseases like colds and flus are spread through close contact in schools, office buildings and subways the exact same as they are every other major city on the planet.
Masks?
> I'm not saying New York is a paragon of cleanliness, but you will have to show some scientific evidence that curbside trash pickup or the occasional subway rat has anything to do with the prevalence of modern-day diseases. Because they simply do not as common knowledge suggests.
Initial reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rats_in_New_York_City#Disease,...
Diseases carried by NYC rats: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25316698
Hong Kong and literal SARS: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12932393/
"Urban Norway and black rats (Rattus norvegicus and Rattus rattus) are the source of a number of pathogens responsible for significant human morbidity and mortality in cities around the world.": https://doi.org/10.1089/vbz.2012.1195
Yes, we all know rats can carry disease, and that this has been a historical problem (e.g. the Black Death).
But it's not like coming into physical contact with a rat, or even their droppings or anything, is a common occurrence in NYC.
In 10 years living in New York City, I've seen a rat maybe 50 times total? Every single one was on the subway tracks (i.e. inaccessible), except exactly once I saw one at the end of the deserted platform, but far away from people.
Now I'm sure there are rats elsewhere, I'm just a single data point.
But nevertheless, to put it simply, getting diseases from rats is not a known public health problem in New York City. You cannot extrapolate a risk here simply from the presence of rats.
If you're up for a more disturbing experience, go sit on those benches at the south end of Riverside Park--the ones next to the ivy or whatever. Listen for the squeaking. Guess what? Those are rats. Lots and lots of rats, like in Jurassic Park or something.
I haven't been to Tokyo, but I have sat and watched groups of rats feast on curbside trash in Upper Manhattan. Many times. (And the roaches--ugh.)