1,015 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
    1. Larremore, D. B., Wilder, B., Lester, E., Shehata, S., Burke, J. M., Hay, J. A., Tambe, M., Mina, M. J., & Parker, R. (2020). Test sensitivity is secondary to frequency and turnaround time for COVID-19 surveillance. MedRxiv, 2020.06.22.20136309. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.22.20136309

    1. Ghio, D., Lawes-Wickwar, S., Tang, M. Y., Epton, T., Howlett, N., Jenkinson, E., Stanescu, S., Westbrook, J., Kassianos, A., Watson, D., Sutherland, L., Stanulewicz, N., Guest, E., Scanlan, D., Carr, N., Chater, A., Hotham, S., Thorneloe, R., Armitage, C., … Keyworth, C. (2020). What influences people’s responses to public health messages for managing risks and preventing infectious diseases? A rapid systematic review of the evidence and recommendations [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nz7tr

    1. Hotez, P., Batista, C., Ergonul, O., Figueroa, J. P., Gilbert, S., Gursel, M., Hassanain, M., Kang, G., Kim, J. H., Lall, B., Larson, H., Naniche, D., Sheahan, T., Shoham, S., Wilder-Smith, A., Strub-Wourgaft, N., Yadav, P., & Bottazzi, M. E. (2021). Correcting COVID-19 vaccine misinformation: Lancet Commission on COVID-19 Vaccines and Therapeutics Task Force Members*. EClinicalMedicine, 33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100780

    1. Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH. (2020, November 20). Today was a very, very odd day I testified before @senatehomeland They held a hearing on hydroxychloroquine. Yup, HCQ In the middle of the worst surge of pandemic HCQ It was clear how our information architecture shapes questions of science and medicine of COVID A thread [Tweet]. @ashishkjha. https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1329646432958156801

    1. As Karan pointed out to us, the fact that some people refuse to wear masks makes it even more imperative that we distribute higher-grade masks to those willing to wear them.

      Abraar Karan on coronavirus masks

    1. <small><cite class='h-cite via'> <span class='p-author h-card'>Charlie Warzel and Zeynep Tufekci</span> in Opinion | It’s Been 10 Months, and I Still Don’t Know When to Replace My Mask! - The New York Times (<time class='dt-published'>03/02/2021 04:23:02</time>)</cite></small>

    1. Fit is very important for upping one’s mask game.

      Mask fit is important for helping to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

    2. If I were wearing an N95 just for the weekly grocery store run, I’d probably be fine with alternating two carefully handled masks for many months as long as the elastic works and there’s no soiling. That’s not a lot of use! But if I were wearing one all day, every workday, I’d consider having one for each day and replacing them maybe every month. So that’s about five per month. Could one be really careful and make that two months? Probably.

      Guidance on how long masks could potentially be worn and used/reused.

    3. I will give a modified version of what health care workers were advised during the worst of the shortages. Rotating a few is enough for disinfection. Just let them rest for a few days in a non-airtight container (like a paper bag or a Tupperware container with holes) and replace one only when it no longer fits well or the elastics have gone soft, or if it is soiled. It’s also good to use hand-sanitizer before putting them on and taking them off. Handle them gently, because a good fit is essential to getting the most out of it. My sense from having heard a lot from people using all the other disinfection methods, like heat, is that they just increase the risk of damaging the mask.

      They've definitely buried the lede here, but this is the answer everyone will be looking for.

    4. It’s Been 10 Months, and I Still Don’t Know When to Replace My Mask!

      It is a horrific public health problem that this is a headline nearly a year later.

  2. Feb 2021
    1. Ghio, D., Lawes-Wickwar, S., Tang, M. Y., Epton, T., Howlett, N., Jenkinson, E., Stanescu, S., Westbrook, J., Kassianos, A., Watson, D., Sutherland, L., Stanulewicz, N., Guest, E., Scanlan, D., Carr, N., Chater, A., Hotham, S., Thorneloe, R., Armitage, C., … Keyworth, C. (2020). What influences people’s responses to public health messages for managing risks and preventing infectious diseases? A rapid systematic review of the evidence and recommendations [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nz7tr

    1. Carl T. Bergstrom. (2020, December 5). I don’t have a background in medical ethics but this makes me uncomfortable unless it was very clearly explained to study participants at enrollment, and to some degree even then. H/t @RMCarpiano https://t.co/WUE1mXgjJG https://t.co/yLXkxIa5O8 [Tweet]. @CT_Bergstrom. https://twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1335152266840424449

    1. Maryanne Garry 🐑🇳🇿. (2020, December 12). A person with the virus who, say, has lunch with friends is a witness to an event in which the virus was possibly transmitted, and a suspect who might have transmitted it to others. Our new paper in PoPS @lorraine_hope @rachelz @drayeshaverrall and Jamie Robertson https://t.co/FoOlx78HB2 [Tweet]. @drlambchop. https://twitter.com/drlambchop/status/1337676716936896512

    1. Verani, J. R., Baqui, A. H., Broome, C. V., Cherian, T., Cohen, C., Farrar, J. L., Feikin, D. R., Groome, M. J., Hajjeh, R. A., Johnson, H. L., Madhi, S. A., Mulholland, K., O’Brien, K. L., Parashar, U. D., Patel, M. M., Rodrigues, L. C., Santosham, M., Scott, J. A., Smith, P. G., … Zell, E. R. (2017). Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies: Preparation, design, and enrollment of cases and controls. Vaccine, 35(25), 3295–3302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.037

    1. “Telling people how to be more healthy usually doesn’t work, you have to give them ownership over those decisions.”
    2. Vaccination counselors, the new employees were called. In 2017 and 2018, over 50 of them were stationed in more than a dozen of the province’s largest maternity wards, with plans to hire one or more at every last Québec hospital where mothers give birth by 2021. The counselors are themselves a kind of prophylaxis. Their job is to ask about parents’ worries long before anyone’s trying to vaccinate their kids at 2 months of age, to answer whatever questions come up — in other words, to inoculate against the misconceptions that might infect them online.

      Interesting take on the public health interpretation of prophylaxis.

  3. Jan 2021
    1. Ball. P. (2020) Pandemic science and politics.. Retrieved from: chrome-extension://bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek/pdfjs/web/viewer.html?file=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelancet.com%2Faction%2FshowPdf%3Fpii%3DS0140-6736%252820%252931594-4

    1. Science says the risk of transmission outdoors is roughly 20 times lower than it is inside.Even a faint breeze helps to disperse most virus particles that hang in the air.The risk is low, but it's not zero.
  4. Dec 2020
    1. Bu Experts {@BU Experts} (2020) How can we navigate daily life during the pandemic? #Publichealth expert & epidemiologist @EpiEllie will be on @reddit_AMA this Thursday (8/27) at 12pm ET to answer all of your #COVID19-related questions. She'll discuss how to safely see friends and family, travel & more. @BUSPH. Twitter. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/BUexperts/status/1297932614909792258

    1. When they did pay attention, they invariably blamed the victims — their “unhealthy” behaviors and diets, their genes, the under-resourced neighborhoods they “chose” to live in and the low-paying jobs they “chose” to work. Their chronic illnesses were seen as failures of personal responsibility. Their shorter life expectancy was written off to addiction and the myth of “black-on-black” violence. Many of those arguments were legacies of the slave and Jim Crow eras, when the white medical and science establishment promoted the idea of innate Black inferiority and criminality to rationalize systems built on servitude and segregation.

      Is this an example of de jure or de facto racism and discrimination? Explain your thinking.

    2. public health experts mostly ignored the disparities

      Who do you think these experts were? How might that have changed?

    1. Evidence and experience suggest that in pandemic phase 6 (increased and sustained transmission in the general population), aggressive interventions to isolate patients and quarantine contacts, even if they are the first patients detected in a community, would probably be ineffective, not a good use of limited health resources, and socially disruptive.

      Ontario going in lockdown after the 26 December.

    2. Field studies coordinated by WHO will be needed to assess virus transmission characteristics, amplifying groups (e.g., children vs. adults), and attack and death rates. Information on these factors will be needed urgently at the onset of a pandemic because the pandemic subtype may behave differently than previous pandemic or seasonal strains. Such studies will also be needed throughout the pandemic period to determine if these factors are changing and, if so, to make informed decisions regarding public health response measures, especially those that are more costly or disruptive.

      Public Health Ontario are you following this? If this is not the case the entire "brain trust" should summarily dismissed.

    1. The official definition of a “close contact” — 15 minutes, within six feet — isn’t foolproof.

      The takeaway: The official definition of a "close contact" for COVID-19 is not foolproof.

      The claim: The official definition of a "close contact" - 15 minutes, within six feet - isn't foolproof.

      The evidence: In Korea, a person sitting in a restaurant 6.5 meters (>20ft) away from the COVID index case for five minutes was infected, most likely because airflow from the air conditioner carried droplets with COVID-19 from the infected person to the person who became infected (1). How common transmission across large distances occurs is still debated (2). As several indoor outbreaks were attributed to airborne transmission, precautions to prevent airborne COVID transmission are needed (3). Examples include better air filtration/UV to kill virus in the system, increased air flow from outside, avoidance of recirculating interior air, and avoiding overcrowding in interior spaces.

      Sources:

      1) https://jkms.org/DOIx.php?id=10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e415

      2) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093420302858?via%3Dihub

      3) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7454469/pdf/ciaa939.pdf

    1. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19.

      Public health departments world wide are failing.

    2. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.

      The cure is worse than the disease.

  5. Nov 2020
    1. The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use.

      The takeaway: While minimal protection occurs when a mask is worn in a place where many others are not wearing a mask, community masking is associated with a reduction in COVID cases.

      The claim: In a community with modest infection rates, some social distancing, and most people not wearing masks, wearing a surgical mask did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate by more than 50%.

      The evidence: This study showed that wearing a mask in a community where most people did not wear a mask, did not reduce the risk of getting infected by 50%. Fewer COVID infections were reported in the mask group than in the unmasked group. This study agrees with a meta analysis which showed that masks resulted in a decrease in infections but did not prevent all infections (1) According to the CDC, seven studies have shown community level benefit when masking recommendations were made (2).

      When most in the community are not wearing masks, social distancing, and washing hands, wearing a mask alone provides minimal protection to the mask wearer. Community wide masking is associated with a reduction in COVID cases (2).

      Sources:

      1) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29140516/

      2) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html

    1. Anxiety From Reactions to Covid-19 Will Destroy At Least Seven Times More Years of Life Than Can Be Saved by Lockdowns

      Take away: Though the number of COVID deaths prevented and the exact number of years lost due directly to decreases in mental health from lockdowns is at best a rough estimate, several facts are known. Lockdowns decrease mental health, and a decrease in mental health shortens lives too.

      The claim: Anxiety from reactions to COVID-19 will destroy at least seven times more years of life than can be saved by lockdowns.

      The evidence: This article references many studies detailing the anxiety surrounding COVID-19 (1-4). These studies indicate that many people have increased stress due to COVID. Nature Public Health Emergency Collection reports that the mental health cost of widespread lockdowns may negate the lives saved by this policy (5). This article lists many articles which describe the effect of stay-at-home orders on mental health. Additionally, the effect of poor mental health on physical outcomes is well-defined. Poor mental health shortens lives. Other factors with COVID such as negative media coverage and dealing with job loss and death are also described as negatively affecting mental health. It is unclear how much of the negative mental health outcomes is directly related to lockdowns and what is contributed to the disease, job loss, future uncertainty, and continuous media coverage.

      Several supporting facts used in this article are now outdated or could use clarification. Many assumptions are detailed in this article to estimate the number of years lost due to mental harm caused by lockdowns. One example is the authors used a survey of 1,266 patients to estimate the number of people in the United States who have suffered mental harm from lockdowns. These estimates are challenging to conclusively verify. The authors did choose the conservative estimate for each of their numbers. One example of an outdated number is the predicted number of deaths was 114,228 by August 4th. The actual number of deaths per Johns Hopkins was 157,500 (6).

      Based on the facts, anxiety and mental disorders can be deadly. Lockdowns result in an increase in poor mental health. The exact number of years lost due to poor mental health directly resulting from lockdowns is less clear. Poor mental health may also result from constant media coverage, loss of loved ones and fear of the future.

      The sources:

      1) https://www.psychiatry.org/newsroom/news-releases/new-poll-covid-19-impacting-mental-well-being-americans-feeling-anxious-especially-for-loved-ones-older-adults-are-less-anxious

      2) https://www.kff.org/health-reform/report/kff-health-tracking-poll-early-april-2020/

      3) https://www.bsgco.com/post/coronavirus-and-americans-mental-health-insights-from-bsg-s-pulse-of-america-poll

      4) https://www.kff.org/report-section/kff-health-tracking-poll-late-april-2020-economic-and-mental-health-impacts-of-coronavirus/

      5) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7431738/#

      6) https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map

    1. mink are now considered a public health risk

      Takeaway: Mink are capable of contracting and transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to each other and to humans which had resulted in mutated SARS-CoV-2.

      The claim: Mink are now considered a public health risk.

      The evidence: SARS-CoV-2 infects and kills mink (1). The lung damage in mink from SARS-CoV-2 is similar to the damage in human lungs from SARS-CoV-2. The range of symptoms from asymptomatic to deadly is exhibited by the mink. Based on this pre-print article, SARS-CoV-2 is mutating in mink farms and had documented transmission from mink to humans (2).

      Extensive sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 genomes has been done (3). Mutations tend to occur in certain hot spots of the genome. The stated purpose of the sequencing research is to identify relatively stable parts of the genome to use as vaccine targets to help avoid mutant escape. The genomes of SARS-CoV-2 from mink infections had more nucleotide differences than SARS-CoV-2 from human COVID outbreaks (2). This may be due to a faster mutation rate or to the fact that so many mink were infected.

      Sources:

      1) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0300985820943535?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&

      2) https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.01.277152v1

      3) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199730/

  6. Oct 2020
    1. But that could be a drop in the ocean compared to the humanitarian fallout. “We’ve seen 400,000 die from COVID-19,” David Beasley, the Executive Director of the World Food Programme, warned in June. “We could see 300,000 die a day, for several months, if we don’t handle this right.”

      Take away: The humanitarian fallout from prolonged lockdowns to control COVID-19 could be worse than the deaths due to COVID-19.

      The claim: The humanitarian fallout from COVID-19 could be worse than the deaths caused directly by the disease.

      The evidence: Food supply chains have been disrupted due to COVID-19 (1). The World Health Organization predicts that 130 million additional people could become chronically hungry due to COVID-19 (2). Per the International Labor Organization, 1.6 billion workers have the prospect of their employment destroyed, at least partially due to the prolonged lockdowns (3).

      “For millions of workers, no income means no food, no security and no future. [...] As the pandemic and the jobs crisis evolve, the need to protect the most vulnerable becomes even more urgent."

      Guy Ryder, ILO Director-General

      A number of socio-economic consequences have resulted from COVID-19 lock-down measures to control the virus (4). 900 million learners are affected by lockdowns which results in high risk children lacking access to free meals provided by school systems, drop out rates, and social isolation/mental health (4). Affects have been seen in the agricultural, manufacturing, petroleum and oil, finance industry, travel and aviation industry, hospitality, and others (4).

      Considering the drastic increase in job loss with resulting hunger from financial instability and other social-economic factors resulting from lock-downs, the fall out from prolonged lockdowns to control COVID-19 will most likely be worse than the number of deaths due to COVID-19 directly.

      Disclaimer: This annotation is not intended to downplay the seriousness of COVID-19. Rather it is intended to put the seriousness of the disease in context of other problems that are resulting from measures to control COVID-19.

      Sources:

      1) https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01181-3

      2) https://www.who.int/news/item/13-07-2020-as-more-go-hungry-and-malnutrition-persists-achieving-zero-hunger-by-2030-in-doubt-un-report-warns#:~:text=Across%20the%20planet%2C%20the%20report,by%20the%20end%20of%202020.&text=further%20at%20times.)-,The%20State%20of%20Food%20Security%20and%20Nutrition%20in%20the%20World,towards%20ending%20hunger%20and%20malnutrition.

      3) https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_743036/lang--en/index.htm

      4) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7162753/