Riobard

Or here’s a brief summary on timing of test. Perhaps one concern among officials is that if you are transparent about testing flaws very few people will endure the hassle. Or you will just get more protests about one additional thing because the ruckus about CDC’s notoriously poor early test version will continue. After all, nobody has really found a viable testing solution since. As for Trump’s talking points, he should have been saying much testing yields false negatives rather than saying the only reason incidence rises is due to increased testing. But then the reality implied would be that true prevalence is even greater. That is poor optics for him. What an asshole. Not that I need any less restraint to put my fist through the TV screen when Fauci or Birx come on.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7045805/coronavirus-test-false-negative-study/

The spectre of false negative, probability of 20% or greater error in this direction, depending on the day-to-day course of infection, is well known, even if by 2 virus tests Milano meant to convey she had each of the two versions. It is timing, integrity of sample, and imperfect assay. The only way to mitigate error is to test every day. Even then, no 100% accuracy. Getting in queue once for testing, without symptoms or without a suspected exposure event, at an arbitrary point in time over the past 6 months was essentially as beneficial as one dart toss. Not having symptoms and getting a negative test result while not presenting symptoms amount to the same thing. Possible false security. You may be infected at any time and should behave accordingly. Similarly, her timing of antibody screening would have been key. The article was poorly written and aimed at hype. That you can be sick and test negative does not underscore the reality of test error, as if it amplifies the problem. If you have signature symptoms you don’t really need test confirmation unless a more invasive Covid-19 specific treatment is warranted. The actual dilemma is that testing information related to error in results is poorly disseminated. [Attachments to follow]

I thought that there were many antibody tests in the pipeline that vary in their viral infection targets (eg, nucleocapsid, spike) and the types of antibodies detected (eg, IgG, IgM, Pan-Ig, various combinations), so I am not sure how you would match up an antibody test designed to detect true natural infection with the specific antibody production generated by a unique RNA vaccine that I think differs by virtue of not being a live attenuated virus or recombinant vaccine version or any number of the other more conventional non-RNA options being investigated. I don’t have the expertise to answer but I assume that these trials can perhaps thwart the unblinding of your randomized arm assignment simply by virtue of the unavailability of antibody assays that have the sensitivity and specificity required to assess the immunization signature of the particular vaccine administered. If one major factor in your decision is the assumption that you can ‘gumshoe’ your assignment status, it may be worthwhile to look into this further. You could always apply to enrol. You might not be selected and the decision would be taken out of your hands. Or you could change your mind at the screening/consent stage, no harm no foul, you won’t be the only one. In any case, there is some lead time to explore a few other candidates currently or imminently entering final phase research.

It appears that Spot has survived. Perhaps it will do better if it can split its 6 hours of permissible opening duration and add a dinner service.

You will notice the new hours: 16:00 - 22:00, as the city now allows any consecutive 6 hours per day up to the 22:00 evening deadline, extended beyond the original 17:00 deadline, for bars and restaurants. In fact, the open hours might not need to be consecutive but must be 6 max per day ... I believe it can be split into lunch and dinner service, but that is irrelevant for Espaço Lagoa.

DJT: “There’s .05% more of me to go around per capita since before Kung Flu, and increasing bigly. Take that, Very Slow Sleepy.” ... “OK, OK, less persons men and women, but more TVs and cameras per capita.”

I think the bottom 2 photos may be the same school. At least they are outdoors, for what it is worth.

Georgia on my mind. [Moving this theme out of the Quebec topic]. Three 1st day examples for the state. The superintendent of the school with the crowded hallway photo wrote that kinks need to be ironed out and that masks cannot be enforced. He quoted that the public health guidelines stipulated that close contact of a 15-minute duration was required for transmission, so he concluded that brief breaches of distancing should be of little consequence at point of transfer pinch-points.

Coronavirus all excited back-to-school hard-on be gettin’ those hard-won lowered reproduction numbers against it jacked back up above 1.

In Paulding Co, GA, 65-88% probability of one currently infected person in any random group of 100 people. The low and high ends of the range represent, respectively, a 5-fold and 10-fold ascertainment bias adjustment accounting for non-diagnosed incidence. Betcha by golly now at least one kid in the school hallway photo has unwittingly already transmitted CoV. Superspreading inflated by uncovered faces is what can go wrong.

But with a blue/red distinction ...

If all American and Canadian states, provinces, and territories were to be considered nations unto themselves, raising total global country count to about 275, the province of Quebec’s population-adjusted mortality rate to date is in the top 10 globally, behind a number of USA states, Belgium, and on par with UK. Quebec’s deaths are disproportionately weighted in the Montreal area. The pandemic massacred much of the aged population in long term care facilities, mostly privately run, with apparently deplorable conditions. The Canadian military was deployed to try to help get things under control in those facilities. Harsh lesson.

American tourism in Thailand represents .5% GDP. By contrast, Chinese tourism there represents 10% GDP. Thailand has its head screwed on tight and right and won’t recklessly trade off overall stability for the one-fifth of GDP that is travel/tourism. It is not The Maldives. It is also thinking outside of the box, contemplating reciprocal tourism agreements with select nations as well as designating cloistered dedicated tourist zones. There is a correlation between visitors accepting of that level of management and the origin countries that represent the majority share of visitation to Thailand. More “Western” tourists will not be very accepting of the segregation model and will consider it an affront to privilege and autonomy, but why should Thailand care? It did the proper heavy lifting for its citizens and has honey badger status.

I thought the widespread trend was that most coronavirus-related content was released pro bono. I wonder if print media is backpedaling on that concession.

American Whites, given population share and vaccination attitudes, are the most likely subgroup to compromise widespread immunity through a prospective effective vaccination program. Hispanics and Asians are better allies if you want to bank on reaching the threshold that fizzles out CoV2 incidence. If natural immunity through infection is durable (jury not out on that verdict), then incidence to date also tips the balance in favour of herd protection. Disproportionate incidence for African Americans, if exposure is as protective as vaccination, may offset vaccination disinclination in terms of minimal broad community immunity threshold. It is a tragic paradox.

The article opened in my newsfeed at first, but now I can access only by typing the title into Google.

This: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2020/07/17/black-anti-vaccine-coronavirus-tuskegee-syphilis/

A brazen red fox, to confuse, ripped off a vast shitload of shoes piled up in a mound that outsmarted a hound, the felony aired on Fox News.

Chameleon ... has BF, gives BFE

Unfortunately, many will follow in his denial footsteps and die, particularly if he recovers decently.

Just a harmless l’il flu BUUUUUGG!!s@$&%#{¥

I should add that even if I have no immunity at a point in the future when community herd immunity is achieved that changes everything if there is minimal exposure incidence. Such a scenario opens creaky things up.

The critique is that the Czars-CoV-2 vaccine development may be premature.

There may also be an inverse relationship between symptom severity and antibody protection strength and durability. In other words, get off lightly in infection, longterm immune response light on its feet. In addition, the earlier utilized antibody tests may not have the best sensitivity (not a problem unless the result was negative) and specificity (a problem if it detected a different coronavirus). Worthwhile to repeat antibody testing that was done months ago. In the absence of clear answers, this is where I am at in terms of my risk tolerance for my both my own and others vulnerability and susceptibility, as someone not yet personally infected/protected: Without evidence of my own immunity protection, either natural through infection or artificial through vaccination, I won’t chance intimacy with anyone at all, even if they themselves can demonstrate either natural or artificial apparent immunity. As there may be a window in which an “immune” person can host coronavirus and be infectious while their body’s previous exposure or vaccination status is mounting its defence, including memory cells to trigger a better antibody response at a point in which significant antibody decay had already occurred, I risk picking up coronavirus. It pains me to write this because the guy with an ‘immunity passport’ hot enough to tempt me may be behaviourally more likely to have the kind of transient re-exposure I outlined ... he is definitely not monogamish. The virus does not float around in the air with selective radar like we see in space alien films; it will take its best shot anywhere. I think, as well, a big factor in my thinking about this is how the virus is shed; could somebody be harbouring recently reacquired viral particles in their mucous membranes while re-mounting immune response? Until more is known about these factors, I prefer to defer until I am confident of my own safety ... and of not playing transmission middle-man ... brings to next point. Similarly, if I have reasonably known protective immunity based on infection or on (future) vaccination, at this point I would want the sexual partner to have the same immune status for his own sake, until such time in our knowledge evolution there is greater certainty about my potential for transient contagion. There is evidence that immunity to many other diseases protects both sides, including the unexposed, but the jury is not out on SARS-CoV-2 and understandably the scientific community hedges judgement on such questions, more so they would say “How the fuck should I know?!” if asked about our promiscuity abroad. Currently for me this means maintaining precautionary measures in non-sexual situations and being monogamish in whoring even if I have apparent immunity and I am comfortable travelling. [Sorry: I had drafted this elsewhere and the paste function is not giving font options this time]