There's a joke in the world of laboratories that you know a microbiologist because he washes his hands before and after.
Which is why this sort of headline makes no sense to me in light of this sort of headline.
Notice that the second headline is from February of this year. Four months ago, epidemiologists estimated a 46% increase in deaths this year than last from food borne illnesses. And yet, Los Angeles thinks that doing the same thing will have different results.
It will.
San Fransisco Population: 812,000.
Los Angeles Population: 3,820,000.
I'm no mathematician, but it seems pretty reasonable that if there are 5 extra unnecessary deaths in a city of .8 million, there will be a correspondingly increased number of extra unnecessary deaths in a city of 3.8 million.
Especially since LA's waste management has never been regarded as exemplary, and isn't getting any better.
So, to recap, San Fransisco's planners trade 5 people's lives for a 0.6% decrease in litter, and now we all get to hope that Los Angeles is making a better deal.
I still want to know what they're going to do with wet clothes and dirty diapers. Even if they mandate cloth for everyone, you still need something to put them in when you're out. I guess everyone there is supposed to be rich enough to buy those stupid "diaper sacks" rather than have to use the free bags that come with groceries. (are they also banning those plastic bags to put meat in so the blood doesn't leak all over your fresh veggies?)
ReplyDelete