OSUmetstud

In pure numbers I agree. But if you adjust per capita you can see the worst areas currently are places like North and South Dakota which are decidedly rural.

I think a good deal of the worst spread is now in rural areas actually. The virus took awhile to spread from the cities to the burbs to the rural areas.

23 percent reduction in infection from control to mask but it was underpowered so it didn't reach significance. Also didn't address whether others wearing masks protect you from them which was the original driver of wearing masks.

Theres three cases here today. We've been trying to dam up covid with our travel restrictions but things are getting more leaky.

The falls here are fairly long as we get the SST lag with temps and snow. But we dont seem to get great color. We dont get great radiational cooling and wet and windy falls can lead to a lot of yellow and brown leaves that get blown off the trees prematurely...

I was a bit snippy I apologize. I know its not often easy for people to get up and move to another location. I love snow but I still hate the cold springs and early summers out here.

I'm from Buffalo and I'm still an American. So I'm just saying if its so great there and you have the means then move.

Should be mid-December if approved. The independent board is meeting December 8 9 and 10th and combing over the data.

Cool. Well you should move there then.

Of course, but Massachusetts is currently ranked 1 in the nation.

You have to adjust for average wages in area. People in NY and MA make more money than people in most states. Sure its cheap to leave Mississippi but do you think the jobs or wages or schools are particularly good there?

The vast majority of scientists and scientific papers from all of the world point to natural origin for sars cov 2. I understand the want to go to a more nefarious origin given issues with Chinese govt but the genomic data doesn't support it.

We just started to get approval for antibody therapy and Remdesevir has been only given in hospital until recently. So there should be almost no difference in the ratio of infections to hospitalization as a whole.

The Danish study has a lot of issues...it didn't address the main driver that masks protect others from you...only the other way around. While it wasn't scientifically significant there was a 23 percent reduction in infections in the mask group. You might just say its underpowered. The lab type fluid dynamic studies do support the basic premise that masks are efficacious.

Ascertainment was like 1 in 10 to 15 in March/April but more like 1 in 2 to 6 now. You do have to apply this information to make more sense of the case graphs. We've finally overtaken wave 1 imo if you apply this bias. So id say the current wave is the biggest followed by wave 1 then followed by the summer wave. This also aligns well with hospitalizations. None of the prescribed treatments in widespread use do anything to keep people out of hospital. The CDC data is delayed so hospitalization are higher in wave 3 than shown.

Dr. Daniel Griffin during his Sunday TWiV update generally says that kids are catching it in the tangential behavior related to being back in school (birthday parties/after school socialization) as opposed to getting the infection within the school itself.

Poloncarz's graphs have been pretty crazy, in terms of the rate of increase. I know the hospitals are not overwhelmed there, but the trends are not great.

Community of color get screwed either way. 4 times more likely to be hospitalized over whites.

I think they were setup for clinical sensitivity not for community survaillance. Its why there's been an investment into the antigen testing which would be better for that. Lower sensitivity but higher percentage of positives would actually be infectious.

Agreed.

I'm not sure thats true. Those positives often seroconvert so they were infected. Were just catching them on the long RNA fragment tail. Between March 26 and April 10, 2020, we measured SARS-CoV-2 antibody titres in 1343 people. Of the 624 participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had serologies done after 4 weeks, all but three seroconverted to the SARS-CoV-2 spike https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30120-8/fulltext

Everything I've read from folks like Mina about the testing is that the high cycle threshold value for the RT PCR is fine for confirmatory medical diagnosis (covid symptoms and pcr positive) but it has little value for finding infectious people in the community. We tend to find people way too late in the illness for it to be all that useful for contract tracing. As far as I understand people who have a positive PCR are typically not false positives since they very often seroconvert (greater than 90%).

In 1918, they mandated masks in some places, closed schools, and some businesses and things didn't stay like that indefinitely. In 1905 they mandated smallpox vaccination in Massachusetts. I think we'll be alright.

I think the liquid requirement is for an acetone-peroxide type bomb. I agree its pretty silly.