how infectious it is, and how serious it is once you have it. The first is roughly described by the R0 (basic reproduction rate), and the second by the case fatality rate.
This seems wrong. The metric of how likely you die when you are infected is the infection fatality rate. The case fatality rate is how likely you are to do once you are diagnosed with the virus and became a medical case.
Whether or not a published paper has a hypnothesis that’s true or not true is a known unknown and not a unknown unknown or a black swan.
It seems to me like the role of LessWrong should be to produce new ideas and be at the cutting edge. It’s not a place that’s valuable as a venue for hearing the same ideas from elsewhere repeated without much filtering.
Noon is a pretty poor definition for an international event where noon is at quite different times.
It might very well be that they can measure the variations with higher accuracy then they can measure the percentage because there are constant factors like skin color that affect the percentage but that can be factored out when comparing daily values. I guess that for doing self diagnosis you want to know how your values derivate from normal.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ gives data. But I don’t have much further insight.
Mali for example went yesterday from 4 cases to 11.
It seems to me like a lot of it is already priced in for example the Euro to Brazilian Real exchange went in six weeks from 4.63 to 5.63 and the Brazilian stock-market. There might still be possibilities but I don’t know enough about the market.
From a comment on the Quantified Self forum:
Just today @madprime & I launched a small data collection effort to see if there’s any interesting signal that could be used for those predictions: https://quantifiedflu.org/ 1
If there’d be enough data collected one might even be able to see if there’s personalized thresholds
Holding the railing when you walk downstairs seems to be a bad idea. If everybody does it, it’s a vector for getting infected.
I’m interested in a more structured version like a writing group.
It seems that our current COVID-19 discourse is very much focused on the developed world. It seems that high temperatures are not as protective as hoped for and temperatures are going to go down in South America and South Africa (the South of the continent) in the next months. Those countries have a lot less slack to deal with crisis.
When people in those countries start buying up all food in preparation for quaranteen it already increases food prices a lot. Many people will starve. Others will riot to get food to live. We could end up with a handful of failed states by the end of the year.
The story about Neil Ferguson suggests he got it while being in the press annoucement. It might very well be that the risk of getting infected was worth the PR of making that press annoucement as best as it could be.
On facebook a person left a comment to an interesting story about military funded research: https://www.nextgov.com/analytics-data/2019/10/military-algorithm-can-predict-illness-48-hours-symptoms-show/160851/
Using its own globally-collected data sets, Philips was able to develop a unique algorithm for the Defense Department. Using 165 distinct biomarkers across 41,000 cases, the Philips team was able to create the Rapid Analysis of Threat Exposure, or RATE, algorithm, which the company says can “predict infection 48 hours before clinical suspicion” with better than 85% accuracy.
This post seems to be a bit confused
Respirators are tight pieces of fabric that form a seal around your mouth and nose. They have various “ratings”; N95 is the most common, and I’ll be using “N95 respirator” and “respirator” interchangably through most of this post even though that’s not quite correct. When used correctly, they theoretically offer complete protection against incoming and outgoing droplet and airborne diseases; since aerosol diseases are a combination of these, they offer complete protection against those too.
Filtering out 95% of viruses doesn’t give you complete protection. It gives you 95% protection.
I’m not certain that we will go back to fully normal as far as influenza is concerned. It might be that we want to let all those people doing contact tracing for months go after influenza and general deploy more fever testing.
You could imagine that everybody who travels into the US has to get an influenza test.
It will also get easier to give everyone flu vaccines.
To me the successful CureVac phase I trial for Rabies suggests that they do have a solution for the general targeting.
Given that Moderna is already doing their human trials this month and Biontic next month it seems they also have the problem of delievery to cells-in-general solved.
Whenever you ask people to create a contact it would make sense to be explicit about why the contact would be valuable, and what good will come out of it.
Plenty of women take their temperature daily for getting knowledge about their period. It’s plausible that Kinsa has enough daily users to make these kinds of predictions.
Western countries seem to be all doing mitigation but we will see if a country like Afghanistan manages to do it. Will the Taliban who just made their deal to have their land back accept the knowledge of outsiders, that it’s important to do mitigation?
I don’t think that there’s a single “rational thinking methodology”. We have a bunch of different tools.
While the current FDA works at allow Moderna to do their human trials very early, it seems the same isn’t true for the EMA and CureVac who advises CureVac to do their first human trial only in early summer. Getting the public to be angry at the EMA for giving advice that delays a potential vaccine might be a point of high leverage.
There seems to be a strong need to get the educated public informed about the vaccine development business, so that we can exert public pressure on making it faster at the right points.
https://www.covid-watch.org/ for not privacy violating smart phone contact tracing is high leverage that might not get enough support from existing institutions.
Quantified Self has many points where the existing institutions aren’t yet focused enough.
It was in our censi when we asked people for x-risks.