To put a number on it: surgical masks on the sick person reduce cold & flu viruses in aerosols by 70%.31 Reducing transmissions by 70% would be as large an impact as a lockdown!
+To put a number on it: surgical masks on the infectious person reduce cold & flu viruses in aerosols by 70%.31 Reducing transmissions by 70% would be as large an impact as a lockdown!
However, we don't know for sure the impact of masks on COVID-19 specifically. In science, one should only publish a finding if you're 95% sure of it. (...should.32) Masks, as of May 1st 2020, are less than "95% sure".
@@ -489,7 +489,7 @@Okay, this isn't an "intervention" we can control, but it will help! Some news outlets report that summer won't do anything to COVID-19. They're half right: summer won't get R < 1, but it will reduce R.
-For COVID-19, every extra 1° Celsius (2.2° Fahrenheit) makes R drop by 1.2%.36 The summer-winter difference in New York City is 15°C (60°F), so summer will make R drop by 18%.
+For COVID-19, every extra 1° Celsius (1.8° Fahrenheit) makes R drop by 1.2%.36 The summer-winter difference in New York City is 26°C (47°F),37 so summer will make R drop by ~31%.
...for how long?
But for COVID-19 in humans, as of May 1st 2020, "how long" is the big unknown.
@@ -604,7 +604,7 @@To be clear: this is unlikely. Most epidemiologists expect a vaccine in 1 to 2 years. Sure, there's never been a vaccine for any of the other coronaviruses before, but that's because SARS was eradicated quickly, and "the" common cold wasn't worth the investment.
-Still, infectious disease researchers have expressed worries: What if we can't make enough?41 What if we rush it, and it's not safe?42
+Still, infectious disease researchers have expressed worries: What if we can't make enough?42 What if we rush it, and it's not safe?43
Even in the nightmare "no-vaccine" scenario, we still have 3 ways out. From most to least terrible:
@@ -643,7 +643,7 @@Plane's sunk. We've scrambled onto the life rafts. It's time to find dry land.43
+Plane's sunk. We've scrambled onto the life rafts. It's time to find dry land.44
Teams of epidemiologists and policymakers (left, right, and multi-partisan) have come to a consensus on how to beat COVID-19, while protecting our lives and liberties.
@@ -855,36 +855,41 @@“SARS-specific antibodies were maintained for an average of 2 years [...] Thus, SARS patients might be susceptible to reinfection ≥3 years after initial exposure.” Wu LP, Wang NC, Chang YH, et al. "Sadly" we'll never know how long SARS immunity would have really lasted, since we eradicated it so quickly. ↩
+In 2019 at Central Park, hottest month (July) was 79.6°F, coldest month (Jan) was 32.5°F. Difference is 47.1°F, or ~26°C. PDF from Weather.gov ↩
“We found no significant difference between the probability of testing positive at least once and the probability of a recurrence for the beta-coronaviruses HKU1 and OC43 at 34 weeks after enrollment/first infection.” Marta Galanti & Jeffrey Shaman (PDF) ↩
+“SARS-specific antibodies were maintained for an average of 2 years [...] Thus, SARS patients might be susceptible to reinfection ≥3 years after initial exposure.” Wu LP, Wang NC, Chang YH, et al. "Sadly" we'll never know how long SARS immunity would have really lasted, since we eradicated it so quickly. ↩
“Once a person fights off a virus, viral particles tend to linger for some time. These cannot cause infections, but they can trigger a positive test.” from STAT News by Andrew Joseph ↩
+“We found no significant difference between the probability of testing positive at least once and the probability of a recurrence for the beta-coronaviruses HKU1 and OC43 at 34 weeks after enrollment/first infection.” Marta Galanti & Jeffrey Shaman (PDF) ↩
From Bao et al. Disclaimer: This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review (yet). Also, to emphasize: they only tested re-infection 28 days later. ↩
+“Once a person fights off a virus, viral particles tend to linger for some time. These cannot cause infections, but they can trigger a positive test.” from STAT News by Andrew Joseph ↩
“If a coronavirus vaccine arrives, can the world make enough?” by Roxanne Khamsi, on Nature ↩
+From Bao et al. Disclaimer: This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review (yet). Also, to emphasize: they only tested re-infection 28 days later. ↩
“Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees” by Shibo Jiang, on Nature ↩
+“If a coronavirus vaccine arrives, can the world make enough?” by Roxanne Khamsi, on Nature ↩
Dry land metaphor from Marc Lipsitch & Yonatan Grad, on STAT News ↩
+“Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees” by Shibo Jiang, on Nature ↩
+Dry land metaphor from Marc Lipsitch & Yonatan Grad, on STAT News ↩
To put a number on it: surgical masks on the sick person reduce cold & flu viruses in aerosols by 70%.31 Reducing transmissions by 70% would be as large an impact as a lockdown!
+To put a number on it: surgical masks on the infectious person reduce cold & flu viruses in aerosols by 70%.31 Reducing transmissions by 70% would be as large an impact as a lockdown!
However, we don't know for sure the impact of masks on COVID-19 specifically. In science, one should only publish a finding if you're 95% sure of it. (...should.32) Masks, as of May 1st 2020, are less than "95% sure".
@@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ the second-most important idea in Epidemiology 101:Okay, this isn't an "intervention" we can control, but it will help! Some news outlets report that summer won't do anything to COVID-19. They're half right: summer won't get R < 1, but it will reduce R.
-For COVID-19, every extra 1° Celsius (2.2° Fahrenheit) makes R drop by 1.2%.36 The summer-winter difference in New York City is 15°C (60°F), so summer will make R drop by 18%.
+For COVID-19, every extra 1° Celsius (1.8° Fahrenheit) makes R drop by 1.2%.36 The summer-winter difference in New York City is 26°C (47°F),37 so summer will make R drop by ~31%.
...for how long?
But for COVID-19 in humans, as of May 1st 2020, "how long" is the big unknown.
@@ -550,7 +550,7 @@ the second-most important idea in Epidemiology 101:To be clear: this is unlikely. Most epidemiologists expect a vaccine in 1 to 2 years. Sure, there's never been a vaccine for any of the other coronaviruses before, but that's because SARS was eradicated quickly, and "the" common cold wasn't worth the investment.
-Still, infectious disease researchers have expressed worries: What if we can't make enough?41 What if we rush it, and it's not safe?42
+Still, infectious disease researchers have expressed worries: What if we can't make enough?42 What if we rush it, and it's not safe?43
Even in the nightmare "no-vaccine" scenario, we still have 3 ways out. From most to least terrible:
@@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ the second-most important idea in Epidemiology 101:Plane's sunk. We've scrambled onto the life rafts. It's time to find dry land.43
+Plane's sunk. We've scrambled onto the life rafts. It's time to find dry land.44
Teams of epidemiologists and policymakers (left, right, and multi-partisan) have come to a consensus on how to beat COVID-19, while protecting our lives and liberties.
@@ -801,31 +801,35 @@ the second-most important idea in Epidemiology 101:“SARS-specific antibodies were maintained for an average of 2 years [...] Thus, SARS patients might be susceptible to reinfection ≥3 years after initial exposure.” Wu LP, Wang NC, Chang YH, et al. "Sadly" we'll never know how long SARS immunity would have really lasted, since we eradicated it so quickly. ↩
+In 2019 at Central Park, hottest month (July) was 79.6°F, coldest month (Jan) was 32.5°F. Difference is 47.1°F, or ~26°C. PDF from Weather.gov ↩
“We found no significant difference between the probability of testing positive at least once and the probability of a recurrence for the beta-coronaviruses HKU1 and OC43 at 34 weeks after enrollment/first infection.” Marta Galanti & Jeffrey Shaman (PDF) ↩
+“SARS-specific antibodies were maintained for an average of 2 years [...] Thus, SARS patients might be susceptible to reinfection ≥3 years after initial exposure.” Wu LP, Wang NC, Chang YH, et al. "Sadly" we'll never know how long SARS immunity would have really lasted, since we eradicated it so quickly. ↩
“Once a person fights off a virus, viral particles tend to linger for some time. These cannot cause infections, but they can trigger a positive test.” from STAT News by Andrew Joseph ↩
+“We found no significant difference between the probability of testing positive at least once and the probability of a recurrence for the beta-coronaviruses HKU1 and OC43 at 34 weeks after enrollment/first infection.” Marta Galanti & Jeffrey Shaman (PDF) ↩
From Bao et al. Disclaimer: This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review (yet). Also, to emphasize: they only tested re-infection 28 days later. ↩
+“Once a person fights off a virus, viral particles tend to linger for some time. These cannot cause infections, but they can trigger a positive test.” from STAT News by Andrew Joseph ↩
“If a coronavirus vaccine arrives, can the world make enough?” by Roxanne Khamsi, on Nature ↩
+From Bao et al. Disclaimer: This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review (yet). Also, to emphasize: they only tested re-infection 28 days later. ↩
“Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees” by Shibo Jiang, on Nature ↩
+“If a coronavirus vaccine arrives, can the world make enough?” by Roxanne Khamsi, on Nature ↩
Dry land metaphor from Marc Lipsitch & Yonatan Grad, on STAT News ↩
+“Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees” by Shibo Jiang, on Nature ↩
+Dry land metaphor from Marc Lipsitch & Yonatan Grad, on STAT News ↩