Riobard

São Paulo state may get the jump on vaccination. CoronaVac, launched by Sinovac in China, shows 78% efficacy for its Phase 3 trial results thus far in São Paulo and will likely be approved for emergency authorization. Moderate to severe infection was nil for the vaccination arm, with mild cases where breakthrough infection occurred. In the real world, it could be that minimally 1 in 4 vaccinated can catch and transmit CoV. Only the data for Brazil will be the basis of seeking the green light from Anvisa, although research findings were more promising in Turkey but for interim data for a trial one-tenth the size of São Paulo’s and analysis for only 29 cases of infection. There were 200 or so cases among São Paulo study volunteers, most or all health care workers. 2 shots, at least 85 million individual doses for the state, production will take some time, other parts of Brazil did not enter into any contract with Sinovac. Ongoing tension between Bolsonaro and Gov Doria.

I believe it is entering its 10th month of operation suspension. I understand the city is recently put at ‘Level Red’ but their application of that mitigation phase is considerably liberal, except, perhaps, for a venue such as Olimpo. The colour code represents a triangulation of CoV reproduction rate and General Hospital Ward & ICU occupancy. Also, if I remember correctly, Olimpo does not have much overall floor space and capacity hinges on a fair amount of it per person.

And you need to be logged in. Previously the global travel categories could all be viewed (but not interacted with) without an account.

Two weeks of this should do it, one hopes ... FullSizeRender.mov

Sweden ... takes the syndrome out of Stockholm syndrome.

I think you mean how to retroactively identify them, the problem not being that you don’t know how to technically delete a post once you tracked the URL for a post, but that there are so many and that most are embedded in the text of posts? In that case, I suggest sticking to the ones that were clustered as more of an image agenda, and going forward eliminate new problematic images or, in fact, any post containing them. However, this takes all the fun out of Oz’ participation because he has to scan through all posts as a one-man census board and submit URL’s, locations etc to the webmaster. That is additionally unfair because Oz is the vulnerable one. Everybody knows what a ‘jacket & tie’ event means. Just respect the host and the guidance behind the threshold of an attire situation that deviates from the guidance.

The Brazilian images comply with the Society for Applied Cultural Anthropology standards.

I thought I tapped out all my binging inventory in 2020. [SPOILER ALERT: I was beginning to put outdoor spaceship repair scenes in slo-mo in order to critique how there could be any tether slack in Midnight Sky or Away when dragged along at a gazillion miles per hour. Have none of the show runners waterskied?] Then last night gave Ozark S1E1 a shot. Looks like a keeper.

I think only videos of the ballot boxes are now permitted.

Years ago I hosted a get-together to serve drinks and snacks but the focus, like for other people I knew at the time, was to set up a projector and entertain and educate my guests with my rendition of a nice trip. As the social evening progressed the topics broadened somewhat beyond the range of the theme central to my slides. Infuriated, I threw them all out.

Because the central agenda of this Board is eroticism, not medical textbook illustration. If you post an aubergine image on a cooking site it is associated with nutrition and meal dish ideas ... yum yum. If you post it on a gardening site it is associated with agriculture ... dig plant water harvest. If you post it on an erotically themed site it is associated with ... nyumnyumnyumnyumnyum! unhunhunhunhunhunhunhunh!

Sorry, my bad. I meant “threads” as clothing, non-nude, etc, on which forum threads are conditional.

Concordo. Threads stay on, threads stay up.

I accept. Hahahah. My first task would be to affirm that ‘honorary’ means ‘without the usual requirements and functions’. Somewhat like the presidency playbook. That might limit the prospects of somebody seconding your motion. But I am more than willing to assume all of the authority without any of the accountability.

Dear language police: Do a search here and you will find ‘punter’ is previously used here occasionally for years. Actually, don’t bother ... I can tell you that you would see it in some of my own posts, some of other members’ posts. The provenance is such that it evolved to apply to the realm of sex trade. One of punt’s meanings is that it derives from ‘bunt’, connoting the unpredictability of where an object lands. Sometimes in sports the term is used in a way that neutralizes the flavour of a gamble. However, bunting a baseball off the bat or soccer ball off one’s head is considered more of a longshot at the ultimate goal. Used as an alternative, in trade vernacular, to ‘john’, it highlights the intrinsic gamble in a prostitution transaction. Given an emphasis on this forum regarding micromanaging the elements and outcome of a hire, a tad more obsessionally than more conventional client-provider arrangements, I hereby nominate punter as the most apt semantically accurate label for trade consumers represented here.

Thanks for clarifying. I understand the quasi-phobic hesitancy of the nasal-pharyngeal swab that comes with not yet having experienced the procedure. All I can do is add that it is very quick and painless, about 1% the discomfort of one’s dentist’s needle injected further back your gum line, say, for extraction or crown work. I strongly recommend you consider a trial run to assess the turnaround for PCR results and get firsthand experience of the formatting of the report. You want to be sure you get it all done and dusted within a 72-hour window. If tested on a Friday and departing the following Monday, there might have been added delay getting your results posted to you. Where I live it is a centralized testing site, the results are emailed to me, and for travel I would need to print it and have copies. With respect to stop-loss, depending on your local CoV incidence rate, you can consider stepping up your infection prevention 2 weeks prior to departure, 10 or so days prior to testing. You know by now that there is a continuum of opinion about whether to travel to Brazil. If someone were willing to turn their autonomy in that specific regard over to me, as much as I don’t really welcome that position, the answer is you are not going there now. Further to that, one of the biggest risks in decision-making is the cognitive distortion of correlating/conflating others’ travel without consequence with the predictive potential of anyone’s future trip. There is a short straw. I would question the mental intactness of anybody’s assertion there are only long straws. Drawing straws typically involves displaying all the straws after all are drawn. People do not display their straws as the group draws them one by one and exclaim: “Look, I pulled a long straw; you will too”. That logic is the last straw. The reason there is safety in numbers is that there is one short straw. The larger the group, the progressively greater proportion of the group not drawing it. That is never meaningful good news for the one drawing it; the reduced risk will have been irrelevant. The more herd members claim that everything is (and will be) fine because it was fine, the worse off your own prospects according to odds. Odds exist only in tandem with both past and future. Put them in a wormhole at your own peril. Try not to over-identify with the position on the continuum that supports your desire but is essentially flawed assurance that is not grounded in reality.

It seems to me that there is one or more questions buried in your question. I am not sure why this particular requirement is the one factor that creates hesitancy on your part. Perhaps if you provided a few clues as to how the meaning of Brazil imposing it impacts on your thinking and planning, whether it is impractical for you, or the risk of being refused boarding on a Brazil-bound flight has monetary and associated consequences, etc. Perhaps you wonder if it is a signifier of infection risk. (It is ... the coronavirus case rate is trending at double the September figures.) I would be in Brazil most of the winter spending a great deal of money and my unlimited leisure time if it were not for an extensive list of reasons that prevent me from travelling there. Getting a PCR test a day or two prior to departure would be one simple task on a list of things to do, perhaps wedged between a barber appointment and counting out my supply of tenofovir-emtricitabine, douche, and condom supplies. Spill?

It is evident that I will not be eligible for CoV vaccination for about another year, based on projected supply chain and low priority status. Therefore, have entered a Phase 2/3 double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Baseline blood and urine chemistry panel a few days away.

Confused enough yet?

It seems to me that this revised curfew plan will shift ‘essential’ goods/supplies shopping from what is often early weekday evening and weekend daytime (Saturday in particular) to weekend morning(s?), thereby compressing greater numbers of rushed and pressured people into retail spaces, notwithstanding distancing, etc, as opposed to spreading out this activity more sensibly. With barely any advanced notice to try to stock up ahead of time. My point applies to the extent that the country leans towards a 9:00-17:00 economy. In my northern city this kind of mitigation structure would be seen to exacerbate community transmission risk, even given lack of public pushback. The idea of bringing down the hammer for 10 days, attempting to wash out the typical contagion period factor of the same duration, while ensuring the infection reproduction number stays no greater than 1.0 and the approximate 2-month new case incidence doubling does not shorten, is good in principle. However, I thought that curfews were most intended and useful to dissuade gatherings that tend to uptick later in the day. The impact on transmission will likely be discernible by the weekend of Jan 16-17. Testing rates may drop during the stricter curfew, so it may be difficult to make an assessment at the point a decision needs to be made about the exigency of extending it beyond the point in question. The health authorities also asserted that a recent testing blitz in shopping malls yielded a 17% rate of current CoV positivity. That would put the true point prevalence at 165 or more times the reality suggested by reported incidence metrics for the country. Something is not adding up there.

What antibody test did you have, or will you have when enough time has elapsed, to ascertain you did not have asymptomatic infection? Since the majority of those infected are unaware. I have utilized the antibody assay manufactured by Roche. I wanted to make sure I was not chasing down a vaccine opportunity for nothing.

[Sorry, I tried snipping the quote down but the CC’s at the bottom will not delete using backspace] Re: amount of COVID risk ... this can be quantified for the state of Rio de Janeiro based on current reported new infection incidence data, for any arbitrary number of persons. For example, the current probability of minimally one person with contagious novel coronavirus on board, among a total of about 50 people, is 35%. I imagine it is higher than 35% for the municipality of Rio de Janeiro because the urban per capita rate of infection tends to be greater. Apart from the difference between city and state, the figures are adjusted for a standard undercount; if the bias correction is too low relative to the unknown ratio of reported cases to actual cases the risk percentage also increases. It is an estimate of infection within your interactions, not literal likelihood of transmission. It may help to settle on your own degree of risk tolerance. If you can live with the possibility of a 75% chance at least one person in your interactions throughout your visit has transmissible infection the corresponding number of people is approximately 160.

For Rio Whatsapp contact addition, in case the confusion was country or district code, the format is: +55 21 9xxxx-xxxx Some smaller regions in the country may not have the 9 ahead of the eight main digits for mobile numbers. It seems to work every time, even when I enter it in my iPhone Contacts app. It just transfers over to the Whatsapp. The format may be different if you obtain a local SIM chip. I hope someone explained to the guy that his number can be scrawled inside a toilet stall whether it is recorded in a smartphone or on a scrap of paper.

Cuba is a powerhouse in vaccine development and manufacturing. There are 3 intramuscular and 1 nasal counter-COVID candidates in early phase research development there. However, with a population-adjusted rolling daily incidence currently peaking at only 1.5 persons per 100,000 there is skepticism that even interim analysis of Phase 3 efficacy trials can occur in the near future unless resources are available to expand to other Latin American countries. It remains to be seen whether their internal approval process as a sovereign nation will somewhat bypass the ‘gold standard’ rigours of a placebo-controlled trial.

Interesting. Another big bash planned for New Year’s Eve, called Oasis 2021. BRL605 per head plus optional transport transfers. Some of the same well known gogos as the event that just got busted. I am thinking that sometime prior to the stroke of midnight it may be renamed Mirage 2021.