Riobard

“Why yes, you may try on the slippers for a spell, Guv’nuh, but 1st the ice bucket challenge.”

Evidently somebody is right on, and imposed right on, Covid according to that somebody’s graphic ‘beautiful mind’ ...

Apart from basic information ignorance and character flaws, this crisis draws authentic mental illness out of the wordwork. If you are out and about circulating among 157 people, at the best of times the odds are 50% that at least one will have an underlying psychotic illness. We are going to see these tussles and standoffs culminating in violence towards others, as well as injury/death indirectly brought on self for escalation leading to law enforcement intervention.

“within 16m of” should be “in addition to”, lest people think the spacing is 50 feet. LOL

Are my American neighbours aware of this brilliant Georgia Tech app? It uses the same algorithm automatically that I have been utilizing manually. You can plug in the various arbitrary incremental group sizes anywhere and it provides a percentage probability of at least one infected person. As you can see, a few Florida figures are equal to the ones I calculated manually but plunked into a similar-themed Latin American thread commenced today. The app figures are also consistent with my manual calculations for Puerto Rico as a whole, though the app only provides by county. The app would collapse if it attempted to offer every group size you can enter in the algorithm. Rather, the designers chose to incorporate all counties and update each day. https://covid19risk.biosci.gatech.edu

My location, Quebec province, for reference: 288

One of my favourite Caribbean destinations, Guadeloupe: 1732 persons is the number calculated to present a 50% chance one of them is a transmission risk. J’adore.

Florida: 9 Not Latin America though Latin influences. I go occasionally and took in some nice weather there 6 months ago. IMG_6809.MOV

Puerto Rico: 49

Colombia: 40

Brazil today: the quantity of people is 27 using the same formula.

Checking out my favourite destinations for current SARS-CoV-2 exposure risk potential. Have selected the arbitrary threshold of 50%, essentially a coin-toss, though one can use any probability percentage in the algorithm. Today’s quantity of people threshold for a 50% probability of one infectious person within that quantity is 42 in Dominican Republic. If coronavirus were superimposed on past visits to Paco’s/Grand’s Cafeteria y Bar, a fair heads/tails chance one innocent but risky person would have been there circulating. I believe the place is open with modifications. Cheers and bon appétit.

... for 2020, I would say in 4-6 weeks, maybe edging out diabetes. https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2944635/?fbclid=IwAR340TlZ3HfPeo6RPTM82xQYXsmAeb1BEnFbEaFpifsBz_D0oMEBmP9KPAY

Yet there may be some scope for a redo, integrating the original and sequel.

E just existing on a bleak November day between conservatory seminars, never having relinquished his beret penchant, and having the requisite nosebleed icepack on hand ... O trying to put on a happy front lecturing in Classics ... while both in miserable yearning for reconnection.

Eeesh ... that would have meant the 2nd cumming of Elijah. No eternal peace when the likes of Rubio importunes it.

Six degrees of separation is an idea inclined to have a connection angle.

**Spoiler** Some time later, not very far away, the best hole was not yet taken by storm. Yet it was nice and would eventually happen, full circle.

Haha ... this being a free site the joke meant a bargain to me.

We can’t know for sure. It may be that Benalla was too vanilla.

São Paulo’s New Year celebrations on Paulista are officially cancelled. A sign of what to anticipate. The decision contrasts with the current federal health Minister’s assertion that within 2 months the disease will have softened to a common respiratory syndrome.

Many countries in Europe have already recently surpassed or are trending towards the incidence /prevalence threshold that had been set by EU a few weeks ago, matching or exceeding rates for some non-EU countries that had been delegated to red zone status. It certainly makes sense to steer away from the compass of ever-changing epidemiological metrics and draw on point-of-travel clinical indicators superior to temperature screening. A false negative testing rate of no greater than 6% among Americans is equivalent to the risk threshold set for exclusion a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, a false negative rate of 20% is generally considered to be the norm. If I were on whatever “council” I’d be pushing for a four-pronged set of criteria based on both host and visitor case prevalence, as well as adding test sensitivity to the algorithm, and factor in a transmission reproduction metric based on the assumption visitors by and large are more likely to circulate publicly.

Please clarify that this means opening up to red zone tourists. All that the news releases in English are saying is that tests will be available at the airport and cannot be enforced due to legalities surrounding personal health info. There are already many entry exemptions for foreign nationals from restricted countries such as for essential purposes or transit-through up to 24 hours. Could this mean they are the target for testing? None of the official French websites have altered their allowable countries list predicated on the ‘ PCR-negative “passports” ‘ model. Moreover, the quarantine requirements seem also to have not been revised. I hope this has not been misinterpreted, that it is simply a matter of the various ministries getting aligned and up to speed, and that it is truly a promising step for travel to France.

It looks like Phase 3 of AstraZeneca vaccine trial, temporally the leader of the pack, is about to be launched in various locations globally, with a few thousand doses in Brazil, but six months must pass for efficacy and broad safety assessment prior to clearance for general consumption, obviously likely past 2021 Carnaval dates. Then Brazil would begin to manufacture a large batch of its own supply to supplement a smaller supply available worldwide, pending approval. Best case scenario is that the vaccination target of 100 million doses would likely not commence until next summer. I think the tentative plan is an initial 30 million followed by 70 million. What is unclear to me is whether recipients must first be assessed for natural immunity (or exposure, since durable immunity is in question) given that it is conceivable that up to 5% or more of the population has already contracted the virus.

Hahahaha ... Shirley you are Jonesin’ over both the book title and the metaphor of what my lickin’ is like.