Riobard

Gonna take a shot though the audience here is tough: Bardot is to Gimenez as, in the camp version, Brigitte Bidet is to Susana Gimme-Jizz.

You implied ‘camping’ out, and it happens that French actress Brigitte Bardot is the celebrity the most associated with Buzios. You can take a selfie sitting beside the statue of her sitting on a bench.

Spain has tended to report mortality in latent data dumping fashion.

However, I will add a thought about national specificity that was not snipped out by accident above because I had not yet written it. Globally there is so far no evidence of waxing/waning/tides/waves. Granted, the temporal variations in case incidence onset and in death incidence for the collective of nations get smoothed out in the global metrics. Death escalated quickly early but globally appears to keep pace with incidence. That pattern suggests considerable variation in incidence:death ratio because, assuming Spain is not unique in lower death reports ... for the average global curve pattern there would need to be other countries with high death rates to offset Spain data, etc. Then the 64-dollar question is accounting for why the virus is selectively death-sparing by country. If Spain is the main driver for the minor downturn in death globally, it remains unconvincing that age is a major factor because age distribution globally is likely similar at this point. Spain, like many nations, does not provide data on recovery:death ratio and that missing metric compromises interpretation. [plus I add a graph next post] Stratifying patterns across 198 nations may be somewhat futile.

@tassojunior, what did I ask? You just knocked out a few complex points as I was adding them, by entering an emoticon reaction during the time I was editing.

The kicker about Spain is that in neighbouring Portugal (proximity perhaps a good comparator basis) the ratio of daily deaths to new cases has been fairly constant, mortality keeping pace proportionally with infection incidence. (time out ... I need to attend to something please do not comment yet as I will come back soon) I decided to not elaborate other than to say there are a few reasons why case incidence to death ratio is a poor metric for the nature of the virus. Had a few paragraphs more but lost them.

Because my estimated figure for antibody assay sample size should be 800,000 ... is everyone asleep or stuck on their ‘socials’ in this lecture?

It wiil However, as I look at several countries’ graphs plotting mortality:recovery ratio across time it appears that many have no alteration at all at any point in time you would estimate if and when masks introduced. Mask impact may also get buried within overall strategic mitigation effects. The real story is the enormous difference in death rates comparing countries. Reporting is not standardized and is a ‘shit show’. Mortality rates depend on the differences among nations in incorporating recorded true deaths from CoV, presumed (how much CoV tipped the comorbidity ones to death), and what proportion of temporally contextualized excess deaths may be attributable to CoV.

With more than 3 billion Americans, bound to be lawsuits.

We need more camp in porn? Will Brigitte Bidet feature?

Hahaha ... doctors get more leeway to backpedal. we only get 60 minutes on this message board to revise before exile from the related post field.

Erratum, 8,000,000 not 15,000,000

OK, the NEJM article is very convincing and well written. The hypothesis cannot be tested in a human trial, but retrospective and animal model studies can further investigate. It value-adds to the importance and legitimacy of face-covering. We have mortality:recovery ratio curves all over the world that could possibly be triangulated with the temporal introduction and application of more universal widespread masking. However, the main content of the piece does not match well with the title of this new forum topic.

That seems to be a good location-duration visit calendar since you have Rio previously under your belt but can tweak it with Salvador Bahia. I would personally pick a similar itinerary if visiting were in the cards sooner than later. It will be interesting to have a take on how uniform the alterations are across settings in the pandemic context.

A little off track, but BTW the recently published JAMA study on CoV and Vitamin D in Illinois is considerably methodologically flawed. There is much misleading research that gets published in supposedly respectable periodicals and the spurious findings get subsequently imported into media releases and poured into gullible trusting brains.

Oh you only need a reasonably cross-sectional representative sample, not mass testing, to infer antibody-verified exposure/immunity estimated within a tight enough confidence interval to be statistically valid. A quarter of a percent of the population should do it, 15,000,000? Statisticians can compute sample sizes needed to extrapolate to the overall population. Anyway a lot of this has been done already and I am not inclined to dig into or look for what I have already read. Try searching ‘USA covid true prevalence’ or ‘USA Covid antibody prevalence’ or ‘USA Covid immunity estimate’

Louisiana, at reported 3.3%, is the highest state tally with a potential range of exposure up to 33%. Isolated on its own might be considered to be approaching 50% of the exposure prevalence needed to categorize as a reasonable threshold of herd immunity. But there is just the one partial flimsy wall west of it and it does not barricade state lines.

Reported infection USA to date has reached 1.9% population. Ascertainment adjustment puts it at 9.5 - 19%. I doubt that any of the up to 80% remaining population is spared susceptibility, but presentation can be presymptomatic, asymptomatic, paucisymptomatic, or symptomatic on a severity gradient.

Canada has had a reasonably high dose of CoV, large abatement but new recent upticking, and now the curve trend puts us at 100th out of 198 globally. The evidence is convincingly accurate that the exposure to date here is in the range of .7% to 1.1%. This represents an ascertainment adjustment of 3- to 4- fold the reported case tallies, both to date and in terms of rolling average of new case incidence. The event risk algorithm models in USA estimate ascertainment bias as greater than Canada and propose true case report tallies should be subject to adjustment metrics ranging from 5 times to 10 times the actual detected cases.

Anecdotally means a small number of testimonials or observations, not a solid study finding. The bit of research in Asia and Europe on either susceptibility to getting CoV or severity of Covid-19 disease, across variable blood alleles, is methodologically flawed. I have read the few related papers and have not been concerned about blood type as a relevant predictor. Besides, there are factors that do legitimately contribute to variance in catchable and morbidity, and that can be regulated far more easily than altering blood type (which is impossible outside of Transylvania). Susceptibility to infection vs acquiring immunity, by the way, are not the same thing. Blood type does not confer immunity at the binary level: immunity yes/no.

When you say antigen I think you mean antibody, @tassojunior Or maybe you mean a positive antigen test result predicts immunity, so for the sake of argument equals prospective immunity? In contrast, antibody tests are a better marker of possible immunity as antibodies wrt CoV are detected longer. Detectable antigen has a short shelf life, high chance false negative, and not the ideal strategy for exposure surveillance relevant to magnitude of community immunity. I’ll try to review the NEJM article shortly.

It sometimes helps to enjoy flirting and complex propositioning. I have blurred out this example but it was labour-intensive, a gogo who volunteered his number but I had to do the translating both directions as he claimed to not be familiar with a translation app. My time is well-spent and eroticized for me but more of his time was squandered just sealing the deal than was spent doing the agreed deal.

It seems apparent that the local punters like to be able to go to their hire’s home. Why else would the ...comlocal be one of the central sites that attract among the most ads? It means ‘with a place’ to play. That may have appeal for locals for privacy and for not spending money on a hotel, and it may be that the lion’s share of tricking for brasileiros occurs with the escort hosting, as opposed to the club settings or love hotels. Just a hypothesis. However, if there is going to be tricky manipulation the foreign national is the most likely candidate targeted by a dodgy provider. The locals and providers likely have a culturally anchored mutual contractual understanding that up-sells are not to be solicited or given in to. A tourist needs time to be able to cultivate the finesse that is often required to navigate a bit of wallet-paring game thrown at him, or an assertion by an escort that various sexual behaviours are offered on a per-cost á la carte basis above and beyond one listed pricetag. Just my opinion, in case it seems ambiguous, I would dissuade a new-ish visitor from going blind to an unknown provider’s stated residence (I did not mean for the context exception to be applied to this option), as well as recommend vetting a provider extensively in person prior to hosting. A 100% record of good uneventful experiences for many here is not transferable or predictive for everybody. It does not mean necessarily that the former group is reckless and cavalier, but advice given to strangers should always be framed according to the principle that the advice solicitor and possible vulnerabilities are largely unknown. If you are seriously mitigating CoV risk exposure you may not want the higher volume of contacts mingling in a club with hireable locals, and you will likely be unable to micromanage having distance from guys you ultimately feel no attraction for. This reality, if you are in inclined to disease exposure caution, lessens the applicability of what is usually a strong recommendation for novices to source hook-ups in the clubs. This standard jumping off point may essentially replace private residence hook-up risk with pandemic-related illness risk. It is not the most opportune time for the average inexperienced visitor to gain traction in sucking all the best marrow from all the best bone.

I think many of us want to project expertise and that is much the MO of a message board, but that @SolaceSoul is as interested in inoculating the naïve with respect to exposure to dodgy situations. A few of us are getting a bit frustrated with the failure to integrate the range of personal anecdotal experiential accounts with common sense risk prevention. Sometimes I want to yell and bitchslap individual takes on the question. If you do not take the time to read thoroughly here on the topic, your shortcutting approach may leave you making choices in a way similar to the manner in which rampant pseudoscience is misinforming some folks and widespread collateral damage results in other domains. Forensics principles suggest a bad trade provider won’t kill you in his home because it is easier to deal with leaving your corpse where you live. However, his home may not be his place, and a volatile situation often overrides strategies of evidence attenuation. Getting threatened, harmed, spooked does not favour either domicile so much. If you are asking about security guards, Airbnb, etc, read all the posts here. There is no single correct answer ... it depends depends depends depends depends depends depends ... You may as well watch paint dry as pay attention to one of my personal examples: I tend to make social connections with people in general a few metres from where I stay in any given place. They may be open-minded but should they not raise their eyebrows and be a bit judge-y about the dynamics of sexual tourism, its implicit exploitive potential underscored if parading a cadre of hot young locals to one’s bed? lol Over 5 years I have used the love hotel playbook option. I have had about 5% of my total encounters hosting where I stay but these have been exclusively fellows I know extremely well from 2 Rio clubs and 1 Sampa venue where providers roam on the homo range. Caveat emptor. The prices are so low it is worth the effort to invest financially in some degree of environmental risk mitigation. ———- Not to mention that, in the first place currently wrt Brazil, pandemic pseudoscience may be partly instrumental in influencing judgement about the risks/benefits of visiting and hiring intimacy trade in the near future.

A fist-bump from some will run you more than a fisting from others.