How outdoors became indoors

EDITOR: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the closing of many indoor dining establishments. At first, the indoor restaurants were told they could reduce their capacity and remain open under strict adherence to mask and separation rules. Then they were closed except for takeout. Those that had connected outdoor space were allowed to serve meals outdoors. As the weather became colder and rain was possible, the restaurants put up tents, coverings and heaters to make their customers comfortable.

When the restaurant built its outdoor seating and made it comfortable, did they really build an extension of their indoor facility, outdoors? I would guess that most restaurants have excellent indoor air moving equipment. I am not sure that their outdoor enclosed tented area has any better air flow. Indoor restaurants could have been given the option of replacing their window with screens or plastic sheeting and adding fans to improve indoor airflow. They would then have made indoor dining equivalent to today’s outdoor dining. To the best of my knowledge there have been few studies to confirm that indoor dining is more dangerous than outdoor dining. It is only that relatively uninformed politicians have decided that even when outdoor dining became indoor it was safer than correctly managed indoor dining.

This reasonable analysis can be applied to all correctly managed retail establishments. Airflow in a food store is no safer than a toy store, but it remains open because it is “essential.” Politicians again have no studies to back their actions.

— Jerry Karabensh, Mendocino