A: Failure to account for asymptomatic spread.
My collaborators @biomathematicus+@JacobBAguilar are among the world's great minds on this.
medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
That's why they found an *Ro of 12* in San Antonio.
Let's discuss🧵
Which might ring a bell!
That's about how long the places that beat this thing stayed closed.
More on that later.
It's a combination of biology (things about the virus) and behavior (how we live).
The earlier estimates missed asymptomatic spread.
So they said Ro=2.68.
That was very, very wrong.
Still not high enough to explain these rapid outbreaks
AND add the fact that we are missing tons of cases (lack of testing!)
We say, really?
Why not?
Airborne viruses have Ro of 15 or higher.
SARS-CoV-2 is at least SOMEWHAT in the air, have we not come to that agreement?
Ro of 12 seems down right reasonable to us.
Now we come to the real news:
R < 1 means that each infected person infects, on average, FEWER than 1 person.
It's how pandemics end.
Fewer new cases.
It can then tell you how long your area must close in order to get the spread to a safer number (R<1 being safest).
We are even making a calculator that spits out various options.
Fine.
Do that. But then you must do a modified shutdown for X number of days.
We can tailor this to the needs and, frankly, the appetite of your jurisdiction.
Not one-size-fits-all.
Others will say, No we can't do that but we'll do modified shutdowns for longer.
It can be tweaked.
Then you monitor in real time and adjust as needed.
Data driven.
But factor in human nature and political will.
*That* is how we can do better this Fall and Winter.
Please reach out to us.
We are here to help save the country and the planet.
To buy time until the vaccine comes!
@JacobBAguilar @biomathematicus @LWestafer