Disease

In the pharmaceutical industry, there's a low-level Hatfield-McCoy thing between chemists and biologists that's been going on forever. Each group thinks that the other group is a bunch of morons.

Two independent groups have arrived at the conclusion that the COVID-19 lockdown is doing more harm than good. Specifically, the lockdown is taking more life than it's saving. How is it possible to make a determination like that?

“Statistics may be used to convert complicated social problems into more easily understood estimates, percentages and rates.” Joel Best [1] Introduction

To answer this question for myself, I focused on data from the N.Y.

Understanding the interactions of infectivity and susceptibility lies at the heart of understanding how COVID-19 spreads through our society and may be a key to safely returning to social mingling.

There are any number of ways to measure the value of physicians’ advice for preventative measures, the current study’s outcome was years free of chronic illness.

There is typically nothing useful or entertaining about epidemiological studies. Not this time.

All the COVID-19 statistics are a bit circumspect, counting tests, admissions, deaths, ICU stays, ventilators during a pandemic is genuinely like trying to fix the airplane while you are flying.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which is caused by a coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2, has killed more than 300,000 worldwide and completely disrupted normal life on most of the planet.

The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, has been the source of never-ending surprises, all of which have been very bad.