How do you propose to study data that doesn’t exist? You could drop mask wearing and social distancing, but you need to test and monitor symptoms and close contacts to have any data.
Umm, you study such schools the same way you study those that are using those various things?
So where is all that data about close contacts, anyways? We only ever hear about how many kids get quarantined, we never ever hear about how many of those quarantined close contacts ever convert into actual infections.
There’s still data on how many students miss school due to covid infections, and illness in general. I mean, isn’t that the whole point, to get kids back to school without killing them?
Besides, since when is “not quarantining close contacts or requiring masks” a synonym for “not collecting any data at all”? Your point just sounds like a defensive, rather bitter response to the implication that what you think is necessary to remain safe may in fact not be necessary at all.
Omicron may sideline two leading drugs against COVID-19
For more than a year antibody drugs from Regeneron and Eli Lilly have been the go-to treatments for early COVID-19, thanks to their ability to head off severe disease and keep patients out of the hospital.
But both drugmakers recently warned that laboratory testing suggests their therapies will be much less potent against omicron, which contains dozens of mutations that make it harder for antibodies to attack the virus. And while the companies say they can quickly develop new omicron-targeting antibodies, those aren’t expected to launch for at least several months.
A third antibody from British drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline appears to be the best positioned to fight omicron. But Glaxo’s drug is not widely available in the U.S., accounting for a small portion of the millions of doses purchased and distributed by the federal government. U.S. health officials are now rationing scarce drug supplies to states.
Lots of O discussion. When the doubling time is 2 days, almost nothing you do from a policy response matters, the exponential is just too fast.
You also have to be careful in reading too much into current hospitalization stats vs cases, since if that takes a week to happen, there’s a factor of 10x in the exponential for cases now vs hospitalizations coming.
Maybe we’re going to declare the end of the pandemic. I mean, he can’t declare victory when we’re about to see cases explode and deaths under his watch eclipse those under Trump (despite essentially no vaccines under Trump).
Xavier Becerra, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, in a meeting with reporters this week. “It’s not about cases. It’s about severity.”
Reporter: when will the pandemic end?
Epidemiologist: how would I know, I’m not a politician.
That same matter was raised yesterday with Collins personally by Margaret O’Brien on Face the Nation.
Confronted by Margaret with the precise text of his message, Collins stood firm and defended his writing and his intent. This was apparently a very vivid disagreement on the science between the two groups of experts.
Collins is a political hack. Of course he dismisses the overwhelming evidence that the virus came from the Wuhan lab since the NIH funded the gain of function research that produced the Weaponized virus.
Omicron is quick acting. You might have as few as three days.
At least the Omicron variant does not force you to wait. It is quick acting and can give you symptoms in just three days. This is copied and pasted from The Atlantic:
It certainly might not seem like it given the pandemic mayhem we’ve had, but the original form of SARS-CoV-2 was a bit of a slowpoke. After infiltrating our bodies, the virus would typically brew forabout five or six daysbefore symptoms kicked in. In the many months since that now-defunct version of the virus emerged, new variants have arrived to speed the timeline up. Estimates for this exposure-to-symptom gap, called the incubation period, clocked in at about five days for Alpha and four days for Delta. Now word has it that the newest kid on the pandemic block, Omicron, may have ratcheted it down to as little asthree.
If that number holds, it’s probably bad news. These trimmed-down cook times are thought to play a major part in helping coronavirus variants spread: In all likelihood, the shorter the incubation period, the faster someone becomes contagious—and the quicker an outbreak spreads. A truncated incubation “makes a virus much, much, much harder to control,” Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told me.