The notion is that lockdowns definitely do reduce transmission of viruses, and the proof is that flu diagnoses have been practically non-existent, the core argument being that, consequentially, lockdowns averted a1-2M death scenario. Low flu incidence is the statistical signal.
The one exception is rhinoviruses, which seem totally unaffected almost everywhere and circulate as in prior years. In summary: Other respiratory viruses do seem affected by measures; flu is different, it has disappeared almost worldwide independent of measures.
-
-
Flu also sends other signals, like winter hospitalisation & mortality spikes in young children, which are also gone, so it’s a good bet there is as good as no flu right now.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Interesting about rhinoviruses.
-
yeah. Corona= mostly unaffected by our measures. Rhinovirus= same. You think this would be studied as an important clue to something, but, what do I know.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Any idea if basic repro number for common rhinoviruses is estimated to be higher than say ~3?
-
Various estimates put them around 1,5-2,5. This is probably where Corona is, btw— earlier crazy high estimates being an artefact of increasing test capacity. R is probably a very small part of the story here, viruses appear to have varying ‚strategies’ of transmission
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.