DAILY UPDATE: 967 Active Cases Of COVID-19 In Contra Costa County – 67 People Currently Hospitalized

September 15, 2020 14:00 pm · 18 comments

          • 15,489 total cases of COVID-19 in Contra Costa County.
          • 65 cases added to the total number of cases since yesterday.
          • 962 active cases of COVID-19 in Contra Costa County.
          • 67 COVID-19 patients are currently hospitalized in Contra Costa County.
          • 14,333 people have fully recovered from COVID-19 in Contra Costa.
          • 109 of the 194 deaths were in long-term care facilities.
          • There are currently 23 active outbreaks of COVID-19 at Contra Costa County long-term care facilities.
          • There are currently 139 occupied ICU beds in Contra Costa County (both COVID and non-COVID patients). 54 ICU beds are currently available.


The population of Contra Costa County is about 1.1-million.

Global September 15, 2020 at 2:30 PM

And we are still in Widespread…seriously….we should move to substantial, this is becoming ridiculous

chuckie the troll September 15, 2020 at 2:31 PM

People are just plain OVER the whole mask and cower policies. Especially when we see Nancy Pelosi and others exercising the White/Politician Privilege and then helping to shutter that business when she got caught.

Let people cower-in-place if they wish, wear masks and rubber gloves, etc…and let the rest of us get back to business, back to Church, and back to life. Freedom works every time it is tried.

beerme September 15, 2020 at 2:42 PM

I don’t get it. Why on the main page we are at 7.1% but on the overview page we are at 6.8%? That would put us in “substantial” instead of “widespread” or is it that we don’t get to move until we’ve held that for 2 weeks. https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/overview

Led September 15, 2020 at 6:00 PM

Yeah, same question. I understand the data they use is already on a one-week lag. So our 6.8% is actually from a week ago. And I understand they review counties’ status every Tuesday. Well, it’s Tuesday. So why isn’t the number up to date, even if we haven’t yet held it for two weeks to get to red?

Ash September 15, 2020 at 2:52 PM

looks like we are on track to be open by November? huh…

Dr. Jellyfinger September 15, 2020 at 3:27 PM

Albert Bourla, the head of pharmaceutical giant Pfizer said the company will know whether its vaccine works by the end of October
“We started manufacturing and we have already manufactured hundreds of thousands of doses” .

He sounds pretty confident it is going to work!

Led September 15, 2020 at 6:01 PM

Fingers crossed, yes. But there won’t be enough for the whole population until months later, even if all goes well. That said, if the most vulnerable + health care workers + frontline workers can get vaccinated, that would pretty much downgrade this whole thing from a dangerous historic pandemic to a controlled flu-esque phenomenon. We’ll see if the politicians are willing to let go of their dictator powers so rationally, though … not holding my breath. It’s going to take some pressure.

Wipe September 15, 2020 at 4:40 PM

There are many issues with the vaccine should it pass trial phase. It sounds as if several vacine candidates are being stockpiled should the trials end successfully. However there is not adequate funding and the logistics are not in place to enact a mass vaccination program.

The testing is also showing that this may be two dose vaccine, and if that is the case the CEO the largest vaccine producer in the world (Serum Institute of India) estimates it will take 4 years to produce enough vaccine based on current worldwide production schedules.

So this will not be resolved by November.

Led September 16, 2020 at 8:18 AM

4 years to produce enough vaccines? Enough for what? The entire world? If there are hundreds of millions available in the US, that should be enough to get us to herd immunity. And by four years from now this should basically be another version of the flu circulating.

Sam September 15, 2020 at 4:45 PM

Supreme court just ruled mask mandates, business closures and extended emergency declarations are 100% UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Just like I have said from day 1. Shouldn’t be long before ol Gavin comes out to addresses it. I’m holding my breath.

frenchdawg September 15, 2020 at 10:10 PM

show me the ruling you are full of crap where do you get this from what supreme court ? when sam I

Me September 16, 2020 at 12:59 AM

Btw, If she is talking about the FEDERAL JUDGE that was in Pennsylvania. Not here.

WC Resident September 16, 2020 at 8:15 AM

It was a district court ruling that the Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s order for all “non-life sustaining businesses” to close was unconstitutional on technical grounds that likely do not apply to many states.

Two weeks ago, another district court judge had ruled that Pennsylvania’s health orders themselves were valid as they were temporary.

Pennsylvania’s health orders allow for businesses to apply for waivers. Apparently some waivers would be allowed while waiver applications from similar or identical competing businesses would be denied. That set the stage for a lawsuit that the state government was not treating all businesses and citizens equally and resulted in a judge ruling that the underlying orders were unconstitutional

At present it’s not known how the state of Pennsylvania will react. They can either clean up administration of the orders, which have been deemed constitutional, to treat all businesses and citizens equally, or they can appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals that they in fact had been administering the orders evenhandedly.

Here’s a decent article on the topic. https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/spl/pa-coronavirus-business-closures-gathering-limits-unconstitutional-federal-court-20200914.html

DLo September 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM

This is disinformation Sam.

It was a federal judge in Pennsylvania who ruled against some of the Pennsylvania measures. The State plans to appeal.

Sam September 16, 2020 at 1:41 PM

Wait, did you guys have to acknowledge a judge ruled masks and prolonged emergency powers unconstitutional in a democrat state? I was trying to get Natalie too, but thanks for playing. Do you think the constitution doesn’t apply in California? It’s not disinformation, its future information.

Me September 17, 2020 at 3:12 AM


I love how you try to justify your post but don’t acknowledge you were wrong. You said Supreme Court. That is not even the same has a Federal Judge. Just because 1 Judge does this does NOT mean another will in another state.

Everyone did acknowledge a JUDGE rule but, It’s not the one you said. Again, You are trying to justify your false statement. Something Trump would do. Yes it is DISINFORMATION when it’s not what happen.

Michael1 September 15, 2020 at 10:32 PM

It was a federal judge .

Tom September 16, 2020 at 5:07 PM

A couple things I’d like some clarification on with regards to moving to the next tier. I understand there is a seven day lag due to the collection of tests being collected, which is why they use the previous seven days (ie 9/2 -9/9) numbers. So if that number is under 7 cases per 100,000 people for 14 consecutive days we can move to the next level, assuming the %age of positive tests are also under 8% (which they have been for weeks now). The part I don’t understand is what the average number of tests need to be for us. I read that this past week we were 71% of the state average for testing which resulted in a penalty of 1.1 causing our case number to be 8.65 out of 100k. Does anyone know what the state average for testing is? I can’t find it anywhere on the CA website. I know they do this to get people to test regardless of whether or not they are sick. Since we can’t move from one tier to the next for a minimum of 3 weeks, we mathematically can’t open up fully for basically almost 2 1/2 months from now, assuming the numbers keep falling. Just to keep things in perspective.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: