Newsom contradicts discovery by citing nail salon infection
On Thursday, when asked why personal services such as barbers and spas would not open in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom stated that the first community transmission of the coronavirus in the state came from a nail salon. On Friday, he repeated the claim.
His comments have caused a stir, shining a spotlight on an industry run predominantly by women and foreignborn residents that has been hurting since the shelterinplace shutdown.
But is Newsom’s comment accurate? Publicly released data about a Santa Clara County case and records reviewed by The Chronicle raise questions.
The governor has refused to elaborate. He won’t name the salon, the location or even the date of the transmission he pointed to, citing medical privacy laws.
It is possible that he is referring to an incident originally identified as the state’s first community transmission: a Feb. 26 case involving a Solano County resident who tested positive after becoming ill at a Vacaville hospital. At the time, the infection made national news as the first instance of community spread — not from travel or direct contact with a known infected individual — in the state.
Few details were released about that infection. But in emails obtained by The Chronicle, Solano County public health officer Bela Matyas requested assistance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to trace the infected person’s contacts. In one email, Matyas specifically requested Vietnamese translators to “assist us with our investigation of community exposures.”
Matyas’ email does not mention nail salons. But nearly 75% of licensed manicurists in California are Vietnamese, according to a 2018 UCLA Labor Center study.
Asked whether Newsom was referring to the Solano County case when he cited a nail salon as the source of the first case of community spread, the governor’s office told The Chronicle: “Will let the governor’s remarks today speak for themselves at the moment” and provided a link to his Friday news conference.
Newsom was asked Friday about nail salons taking offense to his singling out their industry in his remarks the day before.
“Factually, that’s true, it was the first case,” Newsom said. He also complimented the industry, calling it “noble” and an “exit point out of poverty.” And he stressed that nail salons were penciled in for the next phase of the state’s reopening plan.
But what is known about what is now believed to be the first case of community transmission in California — and the country — doesn’t appear to align with Newsom’s comments.
On April 24, the nation’s coronavirus timeline changed drastically when Santa Clara County health officials announced that a woman had died there on Feb. 6 of CO
VID19 complications — the first person in the U.S. known to have died of the disease. Another Santa Clara County man died Feb. 17, also from COVID19. Neither had a history of travel, according to county Health Officer Dr. Sara Cody.
Cody said the deaths “tell us we had community transmission — probably significant community transmission — far before we realized it and documented it.”
On Friday, a Santa Clara County public health official told The Chronicle that the woman who died Feb. 6 did not contract the virus through a nail salon.
Whether Newsom’s nail salon case was the first community transmission in the state or not, the science behind slowing the reopening of such businesses is solid, said John Swartzberg, a UC Berkeley infectious disease expert.
“You don’t want to be in that proximity of another person, mask or not, with another person for that period of time,” Swartzberg said. “It’s just not a wise thing to do right now.”
The discrepancy between what’s known about the Santa Clara case and Newsom’s comments frustrates Mike Vo, an Irvine attorney who is board chair of Pro Nails Association, a group advocating for the industry. He said Newsom has put nail salons in a negative light.
“Now that there’s some indication that the first woman who fell victim to COVID was not linked to a nail salon, it raises additional questions,” Vo said.
On Friday, Vo’s organization held a news conference at a Garden Grove (Orange County) beauty college to air frustrations over the governor’s comments. His group asked the governor to share details of the nail salon exposure so the industry can “learn from that incident.” It also unveiled new steps the state’s approximately 11,000 salons plan to take, such as using face shields, physical distancing and increased sanitizing when they are allowed to reopen.
“Hearing the governor say that caused concern for the community, and people are asking themselves: Are salons safe?” he said. “The governor’s remarks may contribute to further anxiety and even heightened fear in today’s unfortunate toxic environment.”