Universities are not operating as physicians or investigators. They are not conducting medical studies. Studies of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been carried out and are ongoing. At least one of the vaccines will go up for full approval by the FDA in the near future.
It is possible that adverse effects will emerge that have not yet been seen. It ought to be policy that folks with a plausible claim to injury by vaccination have recourse to compensation, as through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP); I think it is an oversight that vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have not been included in its purview.
Although the individual risk of COVID-19 infection to younger people is significantly lower than in older people, this is not a medically homogeneous population. There are nontrivial numbers of college-aged people with chronic medical problems who are at greater risk. Moreover, those students will encounter people of a wide variety of ages, with a great variety of medical comorbidities, while on-campus.
Vaccination against communicable disease is a public good as much as an individual good. That a given person may not benefit from vaccination is not an argument against it. So long as the risk of injury is substantially lower than the probability of an individual benefit and there is a significant public health benefit, a strong utilitarian as well as deontological argument can be made for compelling vaccination.
In general the contribution of an action potential from one neuron is not enough to make the neurons it's connected to also fire. Neurons require relatively synchronized excitatory inputs from a large number of neurons to induce an action potential. There will also be inhibitory inputs from other neurons as well.
Another phenomenon that counters recurrent excitation is lateral inhibition. An excitatory neuron firing will synapse with an inhibitory interneuron nearby. If the interneuron fires it inhibits a great number of neurons in the local vicinity, including the excitatory neurons that just made it fire. It can act to reduce local excitability.
The linked article is a review and cites four studies on HCQ use in COVID-19 as possible evidence that HCQ when used earlier in the disease course can reduce mortality. The 200 mg/d regimen is called "typical" and falls short of a recommendation.
writing in general could be considered a programming language insofar as it's instructions to produce utterances in a literate human being. I suppose esp if we're talking phonetic writing systems.
I don't get this article. The major point here is that a large registry analysis was retracted.
There is still no evidence that hydroxychloroquine is effective in treating or preventing COVID-19 and there is every reason to think that taking an unproven med with potential adverse effects is not a great decision.
Weiss harps and harps and harps about models. Epidemiologists recognized very early on that models had a lot of uncertainty in them; the models didn't drive policy per se but the high downside costs of large infection rates did.
It will take a good causal analysis to know if stay-home orders had a salutary effect on incidences.
The estimate of the mortality rate is not so well known as Weiss indicates. As the 1918 pandemic showed, even a 2% mortality rate can be devastating. As it is the US has had >100k excess deaths b/c of COVID-19.
Also 538 has shown good evidence that people were reducing their consumption and travel even before stay-home orders were instituted, implying such orders may have exacerbated but did not cause the big slumps in consumption and employment.
Data from the 1918 pandemic mostly demonstrated that states that implemented more stringent lockdowns had better economic recoveries.
Sweden has now had 44k cases and has the largest per capita case rate.
What function are you using to compare economic damage to medical damage? Americans started radically decreasing their going-out even before the lockdowns and without lockdowns a significant portion of the US will still stay home. So what's that look like? Economic damage plus health damage? At what point do we encourage people to stop quarantining voluntarily and go out and risk infection just to stop the economic damage?
Sweden didn't lock down and has several times as many cases of COVID-19 as the other Nordic countries. Not having overrun hospitals is not the main metric here. Overwhelming resources leads to worse and worse outcomes but thousands of COVID-19 cases is associated in and of itself with excess death.
Anything original that you write is copyrighted at its completion. There is no requirement to register copyright (in the US at least). The website is copyrighted regardless of the notice, but that notice can alert readers to the copyright claim.