I wrote about how some of that is the sheer arithmetic of a more transmissible variant, tearing through a largely unvaccinated population—but also about the very valid concerns parents have about Delta's severity. 2/
It's a very tough time to be a kid under 12, or a caregiver for one. To know that there is ever-present danger, and to not be able to access one of the most powerful tools that can fight it. 3/
The good news is that kids' immune systems are hardy and resilient. The bad news is that Delta is truly a force to be reckoned with. 4/
In talking to experts for this story, so many of them told me that this was all preventable. It was heartbreaking to hear. So many healthcare workers are being inundated with a tide of cases. They are struggling to care for other sick kids. 5/
As more and more students flood back into schools, cases will probably keep rolling in, unless we deploy the tactics *we already have* to stop them. 6/
Finding a perfect analogy is tough. You'd ideally want a tangible tool that can benefit health on multiple scales; something that varies in performance, according to local conditions; something that addresses a threat that is infectious. 2/
Don't get me wrong, I love a lot of the analogies we've all used, and I think they still have their place. But they might be subtly signaling to a frustrated and confused public that vaccination is merely a personal decision, with penned-in consequences. 3/
remember Ct values? those numbers spit out by certain types of PCR tests, including some of the ones we use to test for the coronavirus?
let's talk. 1/
Ct values correlate with how much viral RNA is in the sample. so if you're running several samples on a test platform, and some have higher Cts, those have *less* RNA (it's a reverse scale; Cts count how many times you have to copy the genetic material before it's "visible") 2/
Ct values do not tell you if the viral RNA belongs to an intact virus or an infectious virus. they also don't measure how directly "transmissible" someone is. to measure transmission, we need epidemiological data - how are *actual humans* spreading the virus? 3/
The day this piece published, one of my own cats, Calvin, was diagnosed with a serious condition, likely with genetic roots, that impacts his heart function. There is no cure. We don't yet know his prognosis. I am absolutely heartbroken. 2/
We adopted Calvin and his brother, Hobbes, almost 5 years ago, to the day. Since then, they have both brought immeasurable light into my life, and have been my biggest source of comfort during the pandemic. 3/
If your antibody levels drop over time... it's not the end of the world. Actually, it's what happens naturally. It's expected. It's your body being economical with its resources. 1/
Think of it this way. Antibodies are ephemeral proteins. Individual antibodies aren't built to last forever. They'll ebb after an infectious threat has passed. But the body retains the capacity to produce them. 3/
Let's first get our definitions straight. Vaccines, first and foremost, prevent *illness*, especially of the serious sort. They teach the body to rein the virus in, and keep it from running roughshod over your tissues. It's harder, though, to stop infections entirely. 2/
Remarkably, our vaccines do this in some people! That's worth celebrating, but it's the wrong goalpost to have in most cases.
That said, our vaccines are still REDUCING infection and transmission, even if they're not stamping it out. 3/
I laid out some of my thinking process for masking again indoors, in the age of Delta. This is my own personal risk calculation, but I hope it's helpful for some other folks who are puzzling this over. 2/
There's no *one right answer*—rather, everyone has to think about their own local conditions: hospitalizations, vaccination rates, variant prevalence, etc. But it would serve us all to be flexible. This pandemic isn't over. And I don't want to lose the momentum we've built. 3/