Have you actually read (and understood) the paper (which isn’t yet peer reviewed) ? There are some questions regarding their used concentrations in the experiments etc. In addition, this is not about Covid-19 antibodies in general but just from plasma (which everybody agreed was never a viable approach to treat many people for multiple reasons anyway). All these results have no real implications on something like the Regeneron approach etc. Sorry to say but from your posts it is quite obvious that you read some headlines in newspapers (which are generated to get clicks) but you have no understanding of the science behind Covid, antibodies, immune response etc. (but still post like you would have clue) (And no, you didn’t provide any scientific papers with relevance to the covid disease for your “feedback” hypothesis)
Really good restaurant. Good balance of refined and authentic. Too bad.
Meanwhile America’s oppressed heroes are meandering around the streets high on meth and maskless and our leaders say “right on!”
yes, that’s it. the drug of choice for protest is meth. you nailed it. really got your finger on the pulse.
Wat
The majority of all US tests are completely garbage, wasted. If you don’t care how late the date is and you reimburse at the same level, of course they’re going to take every customer. Because they are making ridiculous money, and it’s mostly rich people that are getting access to that. You have to have the reimbursement system pay a little bit extra for 24 hours, pay the normal fee for 48 hours, and pay nothing [if it isn’t done by then]. And they will fix it overnight.
Makes sense to me.
My first thought was, what the fuck does Michael Mina know?
You are aware that Fauci makes a lot of (indirect) comments in scientific meetings ? It should be pretty obvious by now for anybody with a single brain cell that the current government is actively sabotaging Fauci and what he would do (and say) if he really could act as he would like.
Well, than don’t use the exact same wrong, uninformed arguments like Trump supporters on many covid discussions. Your constant unfounded bashing of Fauci for example is either based on your support of Trump or a stunning ignorance of science and logical thinking.
Frankly, in this moment I think that Dr. Fauci is the only one we can look to who could possibly coordinate a path forward out of this morass. He’s respected (which, by the way, includes me); universally known; and widely loved. His persona is like that of the family doctor, with a caring “bedside” manner. He surely knows that he can’t be directly fired by DT. The worst that could happen (which understandably might in fact bring him pause) is that DT could find a way to cut funding to his Institute. I like the man, as a person. I often disagree, but mostly I wish he felt he could be more outspoken about specific national strategies that have been considered by his group and dismissed. In particular (of course) I wish that someone in his group at the NIH would at least consider the alternative of engineering-level feedback control and comment on the issues as to why that was evaluated and dismissed as an option. We really need a national-level strategy. People will listen to Dr. Fauci.
“Dry rooms and air-conditioned indoor spaces hike Covid-viral infection, conclude Indian and German researchers in their meta-study. They’re urging optimum humidity standards for building interiors and public transport.“
I recall that increased water vapor in the atmosphere during warmer weather was discussed several months ago as something that would make the covid calm down come summertime – for the same set of reasons. Alas. If it’s had an effect, it’s not obvious.
Still, an interesting article, and maintaining an indoor humidity level of around 50% isn’t an unreasonable step to take.
Air conditioning cuts humidity.
Yes, of course.
Do you know if temperature and humidity can be individually controlled in commercial spaces? I would think so but don’t know.
At home, I have an a/c controller where I can set the humidity and/or temperature target. I’ve always had it set for 50% humidity (really), which I think – when a/c is needed – is comfortable. I didn’t opt to have a way to control humidity when heating, though, although it was available. My loss. It does get sparky in the winter sometimes. And there’s also the dry skin thing.
I think that the main point of the article relates to commercial, rather than residential, settings, however. Covid spread among family members seems almost inevitable regardless of ventilation, filtration, or physics-based phenomena (like droplet evaporation rate as a function of ambient water vapor content). It’s another story when you’re talking about “mixing” all day with non-family members – at work or, to a lesser extent, for shorter periods in close-contact public interior spaces.
Most HVAC systems don’t have humidity control.
True, but AC does pull moisture out of the air. Best trick I ever learned for defrosting my windshield in winter was crank the AC with the heat all the way up.
Right, that’s what I said. You want to raise the humidity in an air-conditioned home or office, you probably want to buy one or more humidifiers. When we bought our house, the only heat was a wood stove, and we ended up buying two or three humidifiers to avoid chapped skin and bloody noses.
The new approach to controlling the spread of covid-19 in CA announced today strikes me as very carefully thought out and codified. It’s a much better control, with both improved metrics and government response.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID19CountyMonitoringOverview.aspx
Except for the fundamental error of going county by county, which encourages irresponsible people to travel.
Agree. That imperfection is notable. Nevertheless, it’s a step forward. Other than applying uniform controls to the entire state, though, I can’t think of an alternative that isn’t regional.
[Well, a couple possibilities come to mind on as to how to smooth things out across county boundaries: (1) Have more than four tiers; and/or (2) base the local tier not only on conditions in a given county, but also in those around it, in a distance-weighted manner (somehow).]
Since there has been no activity here in the past three days, I’ll add a couple of other comments about the revised State plan for business re-openings.
First, a sliding numerical scale (as oppoed to any stepwise tier structure) would be an improvement. The extent to which businesses would be able to open their doors and the limits on occupancy would follow this continuous scale. Things don’t suddenly change when you cross (somewhat) arbitrary, incremental thresholds, either way – no matter how many. (At least the new State approach has more increments, and improved criteria.)
A given business person’s criteria for financially feasible re-opening at any level of government-allowed patronage includes a lot of variables only to each. Any particular business, depending on circumstances, might be financially or otherwise forced to continue to remain closed until the occupancy limitation exceeds a certain personal level.
Second, the distribution of cases isn’t something that’s uniform even within counties, not just across county boundaries. This issue in the new algorithm is really something that should get attention. I have true sadness for those in the hardest-hit areas. The reasons for the case-load disparity in those areas relative to others in SD county are pretty obvious – and along with history easy to understand.
Nevertheless, and notwithstanding that egregious imbalance, should people in SD county regions where there has been far less covid activity be subject to the same exact restrictions as in the most active areas? I think not. Using metrics values that are averaged across entire counties is something that should be re-evaluated.
Third, I think that basing restrictions on more than just cases per 100K (i.e., now including the rolling average positivity as a second metric), is a step in the right direction. But I wonder about what the effect on that additional metric will be if the latest CDC guidance (test only those with symptoms) is followed. A still better metric, and one that’s independent of both which and how many people are tested, would be the actual number of deaths, or (almost equivalently) the actual number of ICU beds in use, relative to the maximum local capacity. Those two things, after all, were what “flattening the curve” was all about, originally.
Here’s the latest, highly lopsided covid deaths distribution in SD county (from the SD Union):
