No screaming on California roller coasters and thrill rides, state guidelines
ocregister.com
ocregister.com
I'd love to see the studies backing up the idea that screaming is actually a concern. This is a science based decision after all...
Another aspect: Don't people line up before they get on the ride? Isn't that more dangerous?
And finally: Raised voices? Does this mean arguing in public is now an offence?
EDIT: Article does state: "These guidelines do not require parks to prohibit screaming."
Edit: I guess nobody understands cost benefit analysis here. Yes, the strength of evidence is low, but so is the cost, yet the potential payoff is huge.
Why is this so hard to understand?
If they really think this is a real threat then I'd fully expect them to be already cleaning the various surfaces of the ride each time. That means alcohol swabbing all hand surfaces. I'd also expect the people waiting in line to be fully masked without exception because people talking is a known aerosol vector.
That's the "reasonable" science approach to dealing with a known aerosol and surface infection threat. But I doubt they clean each time. I doubt they distance properly. In plenty of locations I'm sure they don't wear masks.
If they aren't already doing all those preventive measures then adding a "no yell / scream" requirement is actually just nonsense because the simple and basic actions aren't being done.
EDIT: on a more serious note, if there is no threat then the reason for the rule isn't health-related. That is even worse. That then makes it a rule put in place for health reasons yet with no actual health reasons. That's very bad public policy and sets a bad precedent since now anything can be justified for no reason. Doing it just for optics is even worse.
Again, who cares? Do you want to fund the research to find out? No? Well, here's a simple and nearly zero cost way to make sure screaming people don't transmit the virus.
If the rule has any validity then you ALSO can't tolerate people talking before the ride. Can't stop one activity and allow the other. Talking is a known infection vector since it can easily fill a space like a room with a significant viral load. This is how people get infected simply by entering a room full of infected air that has suspended viral particles in it.
But can you fill an area with a significant viral load when that area happens to be an open-air roller-coaster moving at high speed?
So evidence does matter. Either way.
There is no actual rule here, just ungrounded scaremongering.
Backing what up? The only mention of screaming in any of the documents referenced even implicitly in the article is in a non-industry-specific list of concerns to which the industry plan offers responses (which for screaming, etc., is “mitigate the risk with masks”.)
The actual state industry-specific guidance for reopening amusement parks doesn't mention screaming (but implicitly takes the same approach as the industry group plan, controlling any potential risk with a mask requirement.)
> And finally: Raised voices? Does this mean arguing in public is now an offence?
No, the non-industry-specific notes about that mean that an industry/activity where that regular occurs in groups that cannot effectively distance sufficiently or mitigate droplet spread by other means (e.g., masks) would be more of a concern for reopening conditions than if that were not the case, all other things being equal.
While this is the source headline, it is also a straight-up lie (as is the associated subhead) that directly contradicts the body of the article (given the source and message, more likely political propaganda than clickbait, hoping to drive perceptions among the large number of news browsers that don't read most articles beyond the headline) and should not be retained as the HN title.
And even the body of the article is deceptive; despite referencing the new rules that allow park reopenings on April 1 in red-tier counties, it appears to base any mention of any potential impact on screaming in those rules from an undated reopening plan from an industry organization (that, given the absence of any press release announcing the plan on the organizations website, seems to be from before September 28 of last year) which itself appears to be lobbying for setting the industry rules for reopening by proposing responses to non-industry-specific concerns from some (uncited) state document.
The actual industry guidance for amusement parks which was released some time ago (and remains current with the new rules which allow reopening in red tier and adjust capacity limits and other limits in other rules) does not say anything about screaming at all, implicitly addressing the concern which led to that being included in non-industry-specific guidance previously with masking requirements.
A better headline would be “Theme Park Association: Still Safe to Scream” but that’s not much of a story.
Reading through the article it appears this lede is a straight up lie, no?
>Six Flags Magic Mountain, Knott’s Berry Farm and Disneyland may need to add new warning signs at the entrances to their roller coasters and thrill rides when the California theme parks finally reopen: No screaming.
Is there anything to indicate these signs will be required in order for parks to reopen?
The article’s concern is pure fantasy being advanced as a form of anti-state-administration political propaganda, to fuel the current recall effort.
There is nothing in either the actual published state industry-specific rules for amusement parks, or the lobbying document from the industry association suggesting that such signs would be required, recommended, suggested, or...well, anything else.
The entire idea seems to be an invention of the article writer, whose nearest nexus to reality is the non-industry-specific concerns from a not-fully-cited source which seems to be some earlier version of the state reopening blueprint (but, notably, not the industry-specific guidance which has already been issued for the amusement park industry) which mentions activities involving screaming, etc., as things that need to be limited or mitigated generically to reopen.
But the cited industry lobbying plan itself proposes addressing—and the actual state industry-specific guidance for amusement parks (that the article simply ignores) addresses—this with masking, not any rules about limiting or discouraging screaming, whether by signs or otherwise.
No, it's not that either. It's a not-industry-specific health consideration, for which there is no rule or guidance for the industry in question beyond mask requirements.