Nice phrasing. Waves of Covid I presume.
Remember when it comes to mask wearing, their mask is probably more important than yours. If you are around people wearing a mask and others have naked faces than your protection is less than half what it should be.
Woof woof if you catch my meaning.
1 Like
Update from my wife’s ICU here in OKC metro. Their ICU is full with 4 people waiting in other units for an ICU bed. About a third of the people in ICU/waiting are Covid positive.
The number of Covid hospitalizations has been steadily rising from a low of zero in late May to now a significant number. It is abnormal to have her ICU full in June. Normally she gets put on call for half the summer as hospital census is much lower than the rest of the year.
3 Likes
1 Like
Whoa
The virus is spreading in the US, so it is likely Americans would be barred.
Brazil, Russia and other countries with high infection rates would also be left off a safe list, according to reports from Brussels.
The US may also be a problem diplomatically, as on 14 March President Donald Trump unilaterally closed US borders to countries in the EU’s Schengen border-free zone. The EU condemned the move at the time.
I hear there’s a good venue in Guyana
1 Like
Question for the math people. What is the likely percentage of people needing to have immunity where we don’t have herd immunity yet, but the spread of a virus is likely to slow simply based on having less potential people to spread to?
So it’s the 21st century version of bugchasing.
Interesting to read these two back-to-back. The COVID study comes with a somewhat shocking blog from the editors:
The relevant Science editors discussed whether it was in the public interest to publish the findings. Like all Science papers, the article received support from members of our Board of Reviewing Editors and experts who provided peer review. Nevertheless, we were concerned that forces that want to downplay the severity of the pandemic as well as the need for social distancing would seize on the results to suggest that the situation was less urgent. We decided that the benefit of providing the model to the scientific community was worthwhile. The effects of many variabilities on infection spread, including age, genetics, and past exposures to other vaccines and viruses, are beginning to emerge for SARS-CoV-2. Together with behavior, these factors will affect the degree to which different populations are susceptible to infection, and understanding population heterogeneity may guide vaccination strategies.
The decision calculus that’s explicitly laid out here is whether or not the benefit “to the scientific community” of having a more accurate model of the disease justifies the detriment of giving more accurate information to the public, which runs the risk of the public taking that information and making choices that don’t conform with Mr. Science’s preferences. The mask fiasco taught no lessons.
The contrast is that the poll actually shows that the public has a pretty good understanding of the facts. Actually, the bias is in the other direction, with the correct answer winning by a 53-point margin when the right answer is “cases are increasing,” but only by 12 points when the right answer is “cases are decreasing.” (Also worth noting the misleading presentation of coloring “cases are mostly the same” as blue rather than gray, which makes it harder to notice the thin margin in states where cases are decreasing.)
1 Like
Isn’t that the same thing?
? Seems like they made the right call here? The paper got published.
Is it? I thought herd immunity was the point where the virus is very unlikely to spread at all? What I’m asking is at what point does spread start to slow due to the level of immunity.
1 Like