Research: Lockdowns need to last more than six weeks to contain COVID-19

by Imran Ghori, Matthew Simmons, University of California - Riverside

Credit: CC0 Public Domain

People around the world are wondering how long COVID-restrictions have to last in order to curtail the pandemic.

A research study on 36 countries and 50 U.S. states has found that aggressive intervention to contain COVID-19 must be maintained for at least 44 days. The study is co-authored by Professor Gerard Tellis of USC Marshall School of Business, Professor Ashish Sood of UC Riverside's A. Gary Anderson Graduate School of Management, and Nitish Sood, a student at Augusta University studying Cellular & Molecular Biology. The paper is published in the open sources journal SSRN and is titled, "How Long Must Social Distancing Last."

MARCH 27/2020 MODELING HOW NOT TO PRACTICE

PANDEMIC SOCIAL DISTANCING 

  HEALTH CARE WORKERS PROTEST ON THEIR NEED FOR PPE AND SAFE WORKING CONDITIONS PRACTICING SAFE DISTANCING ON THE PICKET LINE

The authors identify two simple, intuitive, and generalizable metrics of the spread of disease: daily growth rate and time to double cumulative cases. Daily growth rate is the percentage increase in cumulative cases. Time to double, or doubling time, is the number of days for cumulative cases to double at the current growth rate. Time to double in disease spread is the opposite of half-life in drug metabolism.

"Counts of total or new cases can be misleading and difficult to compare across countries," Professor Tellis said. "Growth rate and Time to double are critical metrics for an accurate understanding of how this disease is spreading."

Given these two metrics, the researchers defined three measurable benchmarks for analysts and public health managers to target:

• Moderation: when growth rate stays below 10% and doubling time stays above seven days.
• Control: when growth rate stays below 1% and doubling time stays above 70 days.
• Containment: when growth rate remains 0.1% and doubling time stays above 700 days.

"These simple, intuitive, and universal benchmarks give public health officials clear goals to target in managing this pandemic," Professor Sood said.

Preliminary results using this model to analyze the data suggest that once aggressive interventions are in place, large countries take almost three weeks to see moderation, one month to get control, and 45 days to achieve containment. With less aggressive intervention, it can take much longer. Important differences exist by size of country. Public health administrators should note larger countries take longer to see moderation.

The authors defined aggressive intervention as lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, mass testing and quarantines.

"Singapore and South Korea adopted the path of massive test and quarantine, which seems to be the only successful alternative to costly lockdowns and stay-at-home orders," Nitish Sood said.

Their research focuses on diffusion of innovations, new products, and new technologies. The same concepts and tools can be applied to analyze the spread of COVID-19 and the effects of measures to stop it.

"Even though huge differences exist among countries, it's striking to see so many similarities from aggressive intervention to moderation, control, and containment of the spread of the disease," Professor Sood said.

Professor Tellis added, "Besides size of country, borders, cultural greetings (bowing versus handshaking and kissing), temperature, humidity, and latitude may explain these differences."

The researchers say their analysis bolsters the case for adopting aggressive measures, whether it's the aggressive lockdowns of Italy or California, massive testing and quarantine of South Korea or Singapore, or a combination of both as seen in China. However, the U.S. may have a unique challenge because of its federal constitution.

Only half of the states have adopted aggressive intervention and that at varying times. Should these states achieve control or containment, they may be vulnerable to contagion from states that were late to do so, the researchers say.Lack of testing doesn't explain why Japan has so far escaped the worst of the coronavirus

More information: Gerard J. Tellis et al. How Long Should Social Distancing Last? Predicting Time to Moderation, Control, and Containment of COVID-19, SSRN Electronic Journal (2020). DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.356299

Data science can play a key role in combating coronavirus

by Leiden University

Credit: CC0 Public Domain

After China, Europe and America, chances of a major coronavirus outbreak in Africa are high. "Many victims will be in poor communities where health care and protection is scarce," says professor Mirjam van Reisen of Leiden University. According to her, data science can play a key role in regulating the virus, and Africa can benefit from available data.

Data alone is not enough

Africa can learn from the data of other countries to prevent a serious outbreak. "But data alone is not enough," Van Reisen explains. "The origin of data is just as important as data itself." Van Reisen is part of the Virus Outbreak Data Network (VODAN), a data network in which data can be found by computers and is available under national legislation. The network is global and covers all continents. VODAN follows the guidelines of the European Open Science Cloud, which requires all scientific data to be findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR). This is applied in VODAN to medical digital data. The network can be used to investigate how the virus spreads and how it can be regulated.

Origin is extra relevant

"It is important that we can reuse the data, that we understand their origin, that we know their reliability and that we can situate them where they were collected," says Van Reisen. "We don't yet know how the virus behaves in different parts of the world, which makes the information about the origin of the data even more relevant. Understanding how the virus is spreading is crucial to combating Covid-19."

Discovering patterns

Africa is not yet connected to such a network. This is apparent from the data from the Ebola epidemic, for example. The data is very difficult to find and inaccessible. If the data is accessible, it is often not interoperable or reusable. VODAN ensures that medical data from Covid-19 are and remain FAIR. This improves machine learning and other approaches that include artificial intelligence to detect patterns in epidemic outbreaks.

Implement in VODAN

In order to fully implement Africa in VODAN, ZonMw has made a subsidy available. The Philips Foundation also supports the approach. FAIR data points for interoperable data are now being set up in China and Uganda. Van Reisen also set up the Training of Trainers (ToT) in collaboration with Kampala International University in Uganda. The training is intended for data scientists, computer scientists, people working on digitization in the medical sector, the Ministry of Health and other relevant institutions and companies, to train them in FAIR data storage. The training will be rolled out with data stewards from Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia and Nigeria.

UN launches virus aid plan, says all of humanity at risk
NOT JUST AMERIKA OR KANADA

Credit: CC0 Public Domain

The coronavirus pandemic is threatening the entire human race, the United Nations warned Wednesday as it launched a humanitarian response plan featuring an appeal for $2 billion to help the world's poorest and most vulnerable people.

"COVID-19 is threatening the whole of humanity—and the whole of humanity must fight back," Secretary General Antonio Guterres said in announcing the initiative.

"Global action and solidarity are crucial. Individual country responses are not going to be enough."

Just last week, as the novel coronavirus spread to more and more countries, killing thousands and infecting many more, Guterres warned that unless the world came together to curb the spread, millions of people could die.

The plan "aims to enable us to fight the virus in the world's poorest countries, and address the needs of the most vulnerable people, especially women and children, older people, and those with disabilities or chronic illness," said Guterres.

If fully funded, "it will save many lives and arm humanitarian agencies and NGOs with laboratory supplies for testing, and with medical equipment to treat the sick while protecting health care workers," he added.

The amount of money sought by the plan is small compared to the $2 trillion that the US Congress is poised to approve as a rescue effort for devastated American consumers, companies and hospitals as the world's largest economy grinds to a sudden halt.

Two scenarios

The UN plan is designed to last from April to December—suggesting the world body does not see the health crisis abating any time soon.

The exact total of $2.012 billion is supposed to flow in in response to appeals that various UN agencies, such as the World Health Organization and the World Food Programme, have already made.

Guterres said that in parallel, humanitarian aid provided yearly by member states to help 100 million people around the world must continue.

Otherwise, he said, the coronavirus pandemic could lead to rampant outbreaks of other diseases such as cholera and measles, as well as higher levels of malnutrition.

"This is the moment to step up for the vulnerable," Guterres said.

As spelled out in an 80-page booklet, the UN plan will be carried out by UN agencies that work directly with non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

It will be coordinated by the UN under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs, Mark Lowcock of Britain.

The money will be used for a variety of purposes: to set up hand-washing facilities in refugee camps, launch public awareness campaigns and establish humanitarian air shuttles with Africa, Asia and Latin America, the UN says.

The exact needs of some countries are still being identified.The plan names 20 or so as deserving top priority for aid, including some enduring war or some degree of conflict, such as Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Yemen, Venezuela and Ukraine.

But countries such as Iran and North Korea are also analyzed in the booklet.

The plan foresees two general scenarios as to how the pandemic might evolve.

Under the first, the pandemic is brought under control relatively quickly as its rate of spread slows over the course of three or four months. This, it says, would allow for a relatively swift recovery in terms of public health and the economy.

But under the second model, the pandemic spreads quickly in countries that are poor or developing, mainly in Africa, Asia and parts of the Americas (LIKE GEORGIA, USA).

"This leads to longer periods of closed borders and limited freedom of movement, further contributing to a global slowdown that is already under way," said the UN.

---30---

Limited release of prisoners may prevent COVID-19 break out

ON FOX LAST NIGHT RIGHT WHING-NUT TUCKER CARLSON USED THE TROPE THAT RELEASE OF NON VIOLENT MINIMUM SECURITY PRISONERS WAS ACTUALLY THE EQUIVALENT OF RELEASING RAPISTS ONTO THE STREETS. YEP HE SAID THAT.
HE MUST OF MISSED THE STORY ABOUT THE GUY IN THE UK WHO WAS AN EX FELON CHARGED WITH MURDER TRIED TO SAVE HIS LAWYER FRIED FROM A TERRORIST ATTACK, USING A FIRE EXTINGUISHER.

by Jane Faure-Brac, Australia National University

Credit: Michael Coghlan, flickr

Criminal law experts are recommending the limited release of elderly, young and minor offenders from Australian jails and detention centers to avoid a preventable COVID-19 outbreak.

Professor Lorana Bartels from The Australia National University and Professor Thalia Anthony from the University of Technology Sydney coordinated an open letter to state and territory governments calling for urgent reforms to protect the prison population from the global health pandemic. More than 340 legal experts signed the letter.

"Australian prisons and detention centers will become epicenters for the transmission of COVID-19, if governments don't act now," said Professor Bartels, Program Leader of the ANU Criminology Program.

"Among a range of recommendations, we're calling for the early release of vulnerable prisoners and detainees who are at high risk of harm from COVID-19."

This includes those with pre-existing health conditions, the elderly and very young, those detained for summary offenses such as unlawful driving, property crimes and those who are likely to be released in the next six months.

Professor Anthony said urgent measures, including the release of prisoners, have been taken in response to the COVID-19 emergency in the United States, the United Kingdom, Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

"Australian governments must provide a coherent approach to protect prison populations here in Australia" she said.

"It is only a matter of time before COVID-19 breaks out in our prisons and youth detention centers. This will then have a substantial flow-on effect to the community."

Professor Bartels said justice reforms to protect the health of prisoners and the broader community were essential.

"Prisoners have an acute risk of experiencing the severe and critical consequences of COVID-19 due to pre-existing health issues, and the lack of testing and treatment in prisons," she said.

Professor Bartels said most people who enter prison are unsentenced and nearly a third are expected to serve less than 12 months.

"Tens of thousands of people are likely to be released into the community by the end of the year, making them potential carriers of Coronavirus back into communities," she said.

---30---

How not to fall for coronavirus BS: Avoid the 7 deadly sins of thought

by Luke Zaphir, The Conversation

Credit: Shutterstock

With the COVID-19 pandemic causing a great deal of anxiety, we might come to think people are irrational, selfish or downright crazy. We see people showing up to public venues en masse or clearing supermarket shelves of toilet paper.

Experts are often ignored. We hear inconsistent information and arguments filled with fallacious reasoning being accepted by a seemingly large number people.

The answer for the kind of panicked flurry in reasoning may lie in a field of critical thinking called vice epistemology. This theory argues our thinking habits and intellectual character traits cause poor reasoning.

These thinking habits are developed over a lifetime.When these habits are poorly developed, we can end up with intellectual vices. The more we think viciously (as a vice), the harder it is for us to effectively inquire and seek truth.

Vice epistemology points to many thinking vices and sins that cause problems for inquiry. I have chosen seven that show up regularly in the literature:

1. Sin of gullibility

"I heard coronavirus particles can stay in the air for up to five days!"
Researchers found SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the disease COVID-19, remains infectious in airborne droplets for at least three hours.
But all sorts of claims are being touted by people and we're all guilty of having believed someone who isn't an expert or simply doesn't know what they're talking about. Gullibility as a thinking sin means that we lack the ability to determine the credibility of information.
Relevant expertise and experience are essential qualities when we're listening to someone's own argument. But with something like COVID-19, it's also important we look at the type of expertise someone has. A GP might be able to tell us how we get the infection—but they wouldn't count as an expert in infectious disease epidemiology (the way an infectious disease spreads across a population).


2. Sin of cynicism

"I'd better stock up on toilet paper before everyone else buys it."
In many ways, cynicism is the opposite of gullibility. It is being overly suspicious of others in their arguments and actions.
If you've suddenly become suspicious of your neighbours and what they might do when supermarket stocks are limited, that's a cynical way to think.
If we think the worst interpretation of arguments and events is correct, we can't inquire and problem-solve effectively.

3. Sin of pride

"I know what's best for my family!"
Pride is an intellectual sin (though it's more popular as a spiritual one). In this particular case, it is the habit of not admitting to ourselves or to others that we don't know the answer. Or perhaps that we don't understand the issue.
We obstruct a genuine search for truth if we are dogmatic in our self-belief.
It's effective reasoning to take what the evidence and experts say and then apply it specifically to our individual needs. But we have gone astray in our thinking if we contradict those who know more than us and are unwilling to admit our own limitations.

4. Sin of closed-mindedness

"I won't accept that."
Closed-mindedness means we're not willing to see things from different perspectives or accept new information. It's a serious intellectual vice as it directly interferes with our ability to adjust our beliefs according to new information.
Worse still, being close-minded to new ideas and information means it's even more challenging to learn and grow—we'd be closed minded to the idea that we're closed minded.

5. Sin of prejudice

"I've stopped buying Chinese food—just in case."
Prejudiced thinking is an intellectual vice we often start developing early in life. Children can be incredibly prejudiced in small ways—such as being unwilling to try new foods because they already somehow know they're gross.

As a character flaw, it means we often substitute preconceived notions for actual thinking.

6. Sin of negligence

"SARS was more deadly than COVID-19 and that wasn't that big a deal"
Creating a poor analogy like this one is not a substitute for thoughtful research and considered analysis.
Still, it is difficult to explore every single topic with thorough evaluation. There's so much information out there at the moment it can be a real chore to investigate every claim we hear.
But if we're not willing to check the facts, we're being negligent in our thinking.


7. Sin of wishful thinking

"This will all be over in a week or two and it'll be business as usual."
Our capacity to believe in ourselves, our hard work, our friends and culture can often blind us to hard truths.
It's perfectly fine to aim for a certain outcome but we need to recognise it doesn't matter how much we hope for it—our desire doesn't affect the likelihood of it happening.
A pandemic like COVID-19 shows our way of life is fragile and can change at any moment. Wishful thinking ignores the stark realities and can set us up for disappointment.



So what can we do about it?

There are some questions we can ask ourselves to help improve our intellectual character traits:
What would change my mind?

It's a red flag for sin of pride if nothing will change your mind.

What is the strongest argument the other side has?

We often hold each piece of the truth in our own perspective. It's worth keeping in mind that unless there's wanton cruelty involved, chances are differing arguments will have some good points.

What groups would gain or lose the most if we keep thinking this way?

Sometimes we fail to consider the practical outcomes of our thoughts for people who aren't like us. We've seen in the last few weeks that the people who have a lot to lose (such as casual workers) matter when it comes to the way we respond to the pandemic.

It's worth taking a moment to consider their perspectives.

How much do you actually know about an issue? Who is an expert?

The experts always have something to say. If they agree on it, it's a good indication we should believe them. If there isn't general consensus, we should be dubious of one-sided claims to truth.

And remember the person's actual expertise—it's too easy to mistake a political leader or famous person with an expert.

In challenging days like these, we may be able to help ensure a better outcome for everyone if we start by asking ourselves a few simple questions.
Explore further

Follow the latest news on the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

Provided by The Conversation

As rich nations battle COVID-19, anxiety grows for low-income states

3D print of a spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19--in front of a 3D print of a SARS-CoV-2 virus particle. The spike protein (foreground) enables the virus to enter and infect human cells On the virus model, the virus surface (blue) is covered with spike proteins (red) that enable the virus to enter and infect human cells. Credit: NIH

As Europe and the United States struggle to contain the coronavirus pandemic, aid groups warn that without measures millions could die in low-income countries and war zones such as Syria and Yemen, where hygiene conditions are already dire.

The outbreak has infected some 580,000 people and killed over 26,000 around the world after emerging in China in December last year.

Across Africa, the official numbers are still relatively low with 83 deaths and over 3,200 confirmed cases on Friday, according to the African Union.

But aid groups are sounding the alarm on the potentially devastating consequences of a severe outbreak in low-income and conflict-ridden countries, where healthcare systems are in tatters and hygiene conditions poor.

"Refugees, families displaced from their homes, and those living in crisis will be hit the hardest by this outbreak," said the International Rescue Committee (IRC) in a statement.

Misty Buswell from the IRC said areas like the last rebel-held province in war-torn Syria, Idlib, which was already enduring a humanitarian crisis before the pandemic started, were particularly at risk.

"A lack of food, clean water and exposure to cold weather have already left hundreds of thousands of people in poor health, making them even more vulnerable," said Buswell, adding the devastation in Idlib could be "unimaginable".

'Not enough'

Around the world three billion people lack access to running water and soap, which are the most basic weapons of protection against the virus, UN experts warned.

"Frequently washing hands is the most effective way to protect against the coronavirus, but what will more than half the Yemeni people who don't have access to safe water do?" the International Committee of the Red Cross in Yemen tweeted Sunday.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres issued a stark warning last week: "If we let coronavirus spread like wildfire—especially in the most vulnerable regions of the world—it would kill millions of people."

The UN chief announced a humanitarian relief plan on Wednesday, featuring an appeal for $2 billion dollars to help the world's poorest and most vulnerable people.

"But we already know that it won't be enough," said Delphine Pinault, Uganda country director for the humanitarian organisation Care.

Cancel debt?

After G20 nations pledged $20 trillion for the global economy to counter forecasts of a deep recession, international aid agency Oxfam also said even this was insufficient.

"On the day that Imperial College London has warned that close to 40 million lives could be lost without urgent action, the world's richest governments are still only warming up to the scale of the task," said Chema Vera, Oxfam's interim executive director.

In a separate blog piece, Vera called on G20 nations to cancel debt of low-income countries. "If they pay the debt that they have today, they will be able only to minimally protect their people," he said.

The lack of healthcare infrastructure is another problem faced by poorer countries to deal with the pandemic.

France has 7,000 intensive care beds, compared to 100 or even a dozen in other less well-off nations. "In the most serious cases we won't be able to do anything," said Isabelle Defourny, head of operations at Doctors Without Borders (MSF).

'Race against time'

Imposing a lockdown and keeping infected people in quarantine will also be difficult in countries where a lack of social protection measures will force people to work.

It remains unclear whether the virus will develop in the same way across the globe. The climate and the coexistence with other viruses may affect COVID-19, said expert in infectious diseases for Action Against Hunger (ACF) Dieynaba N'Diaye.

Demographics in Africa—where 70 percent of the population is under the age of 30—may also modify the trajectory of the virus, as older generations are particularly vulnerable.

And several outbreaks of Ebola in western African nations have provided governments with previous experience of dealing with an epidemic.

But aid groups are now in a race against time.

"We can't stop the coronavirus pandemic, it's everywhere. But we can slow it down and buy time to prepare ourselves," said MSF's Defourny.

"The window of opportunity is a matter of weeks," added N'Diaye.

COVID-19: Developing nations face different risks

by Melinda Knox, Queen's University

Susan Bartels, Professor in the Departments of Emergency Medicine and Public Health at Queen’s University, with her colleagues in the Democratic Republic of Congo during her earlier visit. Credit: Queen's University

As the novel coronavirus pandemic continues to impact countries worldwide, we've seen how nations around the world are working to mobilize populations, resources, and government assistance to mitigate spread of the virus and help those who have been affected. But how are developing nations impacted differently than developed nations in this crisis?

Susan Bartels, professor in the Departments of Emergency Medicine and Public Health at Queen's University, is an expert in global public health research that focuses on how people are affected by humanitarian crises, including armed conflict and natural disasters. Dr. Bartels was visiting South Africa for SSHRC-funded research investigating sexual exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers as well as Universities Canada-funded research examining parenting in settings of adversity. The Gazette spoke to Dr. Bartels, who recently returned from field research in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), about how developing nations, such as DRC, are confronting unique challenges when it comes to COVID-19.

COVID-19 is being called a "global crisis." In what ways do you think it impacts developing nations differently than developed nations?

Susan Bartels: Lower- and middle-income countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are at an enormous disadvantage, due to lack of public health infrastructure, profoundly underfunded health care systems, and poor access to care. For example, although supplies and essential medical equipment are lacking in Canada, the Panzi Hospital in South Kivu province of the DRC has only 20 ventilators for its catchment population of more than 5.7 million people.

These countries are also significantly disadvantaged because government assistance programs will not be nearly as robust as they are in Canada (income support, tax deferrals, support for small business, etc.). Compounding that, in DRC, like in many other lower-income countries, chronic underlying illnesses such as HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and tuberculosis (TB), as well as high rates of malnutrition among children, have the potential to dramatically increase COVID-related morbidity and mortality.

How are developing countries reacting to the pandemic?

SB: Eastern DRC has been responding to an Ebola epidemic since August 2018, so when it comes to screening, they were far more prepared than we were in Canada. For instance, when arriving to the Congo by air or by car, visitors were already subject to temperature screening in addition to a health questionnaire that had to be completed.


Additionally, social greetings had already been modified in the DRC. In response to the Ebola epidemic, hand shaking, hugging, and other forms of physical social greeting were no longer considered acceptable, and handwashing stations could be found outside all hospitals, clinics, shops, restaurants, hotels, and other public spaces. These screening and precautionary measures, which have already been in place for almost a year and a half, will now doubly serve to prevent transmission of COVID-19.

Are they helped or hindered by their government structure when it comes to a medical crisis?

SB: As I mentioned in my response to the first question, these nations will be very much hindered because of inability for governments to mobilize assistance in the same way as developed nations.

For lower-income countries, the fact that COVID-19 is a global pandemic will likely distinguish its response from other humanitarian responses, like that of the 2014-15 Ebola epidemic in West Africa and the 2010 earthquake in Haiti. Because those crises were more limited in scale, other nations not directly affected were able to contribute supplies, personnel, and support, which will probably be lacking for the COVID-19 response. Additionally, the capacity and resources of international organizations, such as the World Health Organization, are spread very thin in the current pandemic, meaning they will be less able to support individual country responses.

What are some of the other unique concerns/challenges do developing nations face?

SB: With regards to challenges, in addition to existing epidemics, Eastern DRC continues to face sporadic armed conflict and insecurity and, as a result, it is estimated that hundreds of thousands of people are internally displaced. This adds a monumental challenge to the COVID-19 response as these individuals and families will be particularly vulnerable, but also difficult to reach because of their displacement.

Who are the most vulnerable populations in these nations?

SB: To some extent, I think the most vulnerable populations will be similar in many settings, including those with underlying medical illnesses, the vulnerably housed, those facing poverty, persons with disabilities, individuals who are geographically isolated, and those with limited access to medical care. One of the key differences that will likely make the COVID-19 epidemic harder hitting in lower- and middle-income countries, however, is the higher burden of untreated or under-treated chronic illness, such as HIV/AIDS, TB, hepatitis, and malnutrition.

How is the COVID-19 crisis similar to the other humanitarian crises you have researched/worked on?

SB: In several respects, the COVID-19 response is similar to other humanitarian crises I have experience with. For example, both COVID-19 and humanitarian responses have a shared focus on the health of an entire population, as opposed to individuals (ex. implementation of public health measures, such as quarantine to protect the greater good). It also comes down to the essentials that are needed to meet people's basic needs and to keep people alive (ex. cancellation of all non-essential medical appointments and procedures). Furthermore, outcomes for the population at risk are largely dependent on the policies, programs, and supports implemented by various levels of government. And finally, something that many people can probably relate to—the feeling of uncertainty that comes with a crisis of this magnitude and when things are evolving so rapidly.

Explore further

Follow the latest news on the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

Provided by Queen's University

How not to fall for coronavirus BS: Avoid the 7 deadly sins of thought

by Luke Zaphir, The Conversation

Credit: Shutterstock

With the COVID-19 pandemic causing a great deal of anxiety, we might come to think people are irrational, selfish or downright crazy. We see people showing up to public venues en masse or clearing supermarket shelves of toilet paper.

Experts are often ignored. We hear inconsistent information and arguments filled with fallacious reasoning being accepted by a seemingly large number people.

The answer for the kind of panicked flurry in reasoning may lie in a field of critical thinking called vice epistemology. This theory argues our thinking habits and intellectual character traits cause poor reasoning.

These thinking habits are developed over a lifetime.When these habits are poorly developed, we can end up with intellectual vices. The more we think viciously (as a vice), the harder it is for us to effectively inquire and seek truth.

Vice epistemology points to many thinking vices and sins that cause problems for inquiry. I have chosen seven that show up regularly in the literature:

1. Sin of gullibility

"I heard coronavirus particles can stay in the air for up to five days!"

Researchers found SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the disease COVID-19, remains infectious in airborne droplets for at least three hours.

But all sorts of claims are being touted by people and we're all guilty of having believed someone who isn't an expert or simply doesn't know what they're talking about. Gullibility as a thinking sin means that we lack the ability to determine the credibility of information.

Relevant expertise and experience are essential qualities when we're listening to someone's own argument. But with something like COVID-19, it's also important we look at the type of expertise someone has. A GP might be able to tell us how we get the infection—but they wouldn't count as an expert in infectious disease epidemiology (the way an infectious disease spreads across a population).

2. Sin of cynicism

"I'd better stock up on toilet paper before everyone else buys it."

In many ways, cynicism is the opposite of gullibility. It is being overly suspicious of others in their arguments and actions.

If you've suddenly become suspicious of your neighbours and what they might do when supermarket stocks are limited, that's a cynical way to think.

If we think the worst interpretation of arguments and events is correct, we can't inquire and problem-solve effectively.

3. Sin of pride

"I know what's best for my family!"

Pride is an intellectual sin (though it's more popular as a spiritual one). In this particular case, it is the habit of not admitting to ourselves or to others that we don't know the answer. Or perhaps that we don't understand the issue.

We obstruct a genuine search for truth if we are dogmatic in our self-belief.

It's effective reasoning to take what the evidence and experts say and then apply it specifically to our individual needs. But we have gone astray in our thinking if we contradict those who know more than us and are unwilling to admit our own limitations.

4. Sin of closed-mindedness

"I won't accept that."

Closed-mindedness means we're not willing to see things from different perspectives or accept new information. It's a serious intellectual vice as it directly interferes with our ability to adjust our beliefs according to new information.

Worse still, being close-minded to new ideas and information means it's even more challenging to learn and grow—we'd be closed minded to the idea that we're closed minded.

5. Sin of prejudice

"I've stopped buying Chinese food—just in case."

Prejudiced thinking is an intellectual vice we often start developing early in life. Children can be incredibly prejudiced in small ways—such as being unwilling to try new foods because they already somehow know they're gross.

As a character flaw, it means we often substitute preconceived notions for actual thinking.

6. Sin of negligence

"SARS was more deadly than COVID-19 and that wasn't that big a deal"

Creating a poor analogy like this one is not a substitute for thoughtful research and considered analysis.

Still, it is difficult to explore every single topic with thorough evaluation. There's so much information out there at the moment it can be a real chore to investigate every claim we hear.

But if we're not willing to check the facts, we're being negligent in our thinking.

7. Sin of wishful thinking

"This will all be over in a week or two and it'll be business as usual."

Our capacity to believe in ourselves, our hard work, our friends and culture can often blind us to hard truths.

It's perfectly fine to aim for a certain outcome but we need to recognise it doesn't matter how much we hope for it—our desire doesn't affect the likelihood of it happening.

A pandemic like COVID-19 shows our way of life is fragile and can change at any moment. Wishful thinking ignores the stark realities and can set us up for disappointment.

So what can we do about it?

There are some questions we can ask ourselves to help improve our intellectual character traits:

What would change my mind?

It's a red flag for sin of pride if nothing will change your mind.

What is the strongest argument the other side has?

We often hold each piece of the truth in our own perspective. It's worth keeping in mind that unless there's wanton cruelty involved, chances are differing arguments will have some good points.

What groups would gain or lose the most if we keep thinking this way?

Sometimes we fail to consider the practical outcomes of our thoughts for people who aren't like us. We've seen in the last few weeks that the people who have a lot to lose (such as casual workers) matter when it comes to the way we respond to the pandemic.

It's worth taking a moment to consider their perspectives.

How much do you actually know about an issue? Who is an expert?

The experts always have something to say. If they agree on it, it's a good indication we should believe them. If there isn't general consensus, we should be dubious of one-sided claims to truth.

And remember the person's actual expertise—it's too easy to mistake a political leader or famous person with an expert.

In challenging days like these, we may be able to help ensure a better outcome for everyone if we start by asking ourselves a few simple questions.Follow the latest news on the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

---

Provided by The Conversation 

Historical coronaviruses show evidence of seasonality and immunity

by University College London

Ultrastructural morphology exhibited by coronaviruses.  Credit: CDC Public Health Image Library,

Using historical data, a UCL research team has found that levels of infection from three common coronaviruses appear to have followed a seasonal pattern in England, with peaks occurring during winter and broadly at the same time as influenza.

The researchers found that only small amounts of coronavirus were transmitted in the summer.

The study, published today in Wellcome Open Research as a preprint ahead of peer review, uses data from the Flu Watch community cohort study from 2006 to 2011.

First author Dr. Rob Aldridge (UCL Institute of Health Informatics) said, "COVID-19 is a disease caused by the new coronavirus SARS-CoV2, but other related viruses have been around for some time. When we began data collection in 2006 there were at least three commonly circulating coronaviruses in the UK."

He and his colleagues used data their team had previously collected from the cohort study to understand whether there were greater numbers of infections caused by these coronaviruses in the winter or summer. They also looked at whether people got infected with these common coronaviruses more than once, knowing this information can show whether people developed immunity to the virus.

"Our findings support the idea that in the UK we could see continued but lower levels of coronavirus transmission in the summer, but this may reverse in the winter if there is still a large susceptible population at that point," Dr. Aldridge said.

"However, given this is a novel virus, we don't know if this seasonal pattern will hold over the summer due to high levels of susceptibility in the population. For this reason, it is crucial that we all act now to follow current health advice. Washing your hands and staying at home means you not only reduce your risk of getting COVID-19, but you are also protecting others by greatly reducing the chances of the virus spreading further in the community.

"Acting now gives scientists more time to develop vaccines and test new treatments for COVID-19, and it gives the NHS time to continue to get ready to help those that get sick.

"To understand more about whether COVID-19 will follow a pattern of higher numbers of infection in the winter, we need to learn from other countries in the southern hemisphere with temperate climates to see if this pattern of increasing levels of infection is observed during their winters over the coming months," he added.

Participants of the Medical Research Council and Wellcome-funded Flu Watch study in England were contacted weekly to report any symptoms of respiratory illnesses, and sent in swabs if they were ill. The current investigation included data from 199 positive cases of coronaviruses across three winters (November to March) and one summer (May to September) from 2006 to 2009. The researchers also looked at data from the following two winters to identify people who had a second coronavirus infection and see whether anyone was reinfected by the same virus.

The researchers were looking at infection patterns of three coronaviruses, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-229E, which they say bear similar symptoms to mild cases of SARS-CoV-2.

They found that the highest rates of coronavirus infections were in February, and very low in the summer season, when only four cases were detected. The findings are in line with previous research in other countries finding evidence that coronaviruses are seasonal in winter in temperate climates, with greater variation in tropical climates.

Last author Ellen Fragaszy (UCL Institute of Health Informatics and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine) said: "In temperate regions, many respiratory viruses follow a seasonal pattern with winter peaks during the 'cold and flu season." We believe this seasonality is driven in part by environmental factors such as temperature, humidity and sunlight which affect both virus survival and how well our immune systems can respond to these infections.

"Seasonality is also likely to be driven by our own behaviours such as our tendency when it's cold to spend more time indoors, with the windows shut and in close contact with other people."

The researchers say their results also provide some evidence of immunity against reinfection by the same virus, as they did not identify any people who were reinfected by the same virus. Based on their simulations, if people had no immunity after being infected, the probability of zero reinfections by the same virus in their study sample was only 3.48%, which they say suggests some immunity is likely.

The researchers say that more research is needed to see if their results will also apply to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but given the lack of data on the novel virus, they hope that their findings can help inform the public health response.

"We cautiously infer from this that we might expect there to be some levels of immunity after infection with SARS-CoV2, but we don't know how strong or long this will last," said Dr. Aldridge.

"Our results support the idea that a vaccine could induce immunity to SARS-CoV2, but we need vaccine trials to examine this in detail and whilst this urgent and important work is being carried out, we all need to act to slow the spread of infection down and give scientists time to work on developing these new vaccines."

Follow the latest news on the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

---

More information: Seasonality and immunity to laboratory-confirmed seasonal coronaviruses (HCoV-NL63, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-229E): results from the Flu Watch cohort study. wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-52/v1

An all-organic proton battery energized for sustainable energy storage

by Uppsala University

Sustainable energy storage is in great demand. Researchers at Uppsala University have therefore developed an all-organic proton battery that can be charged in a matter of seconds. The battery can be charged and discharged over 500 times without any significant loss of capacity. Their work has been published in the scientific journal Angewandte Chemie.

The researchers have been able to demonstrate that their battery can be easily charged using a solar cell. Charging can also be accomplished without the aid of the advanced electronics that, for example, lithium batteries require. Another advantage of the battery is that it is unaffected by ambient temperature.

"I'm sure that many people are aware that the performance of standard batteries declines at low temperatures. We have demonstrated that this organic proton battery retains properties such as capacity down to as low as -24°C," says Christian Strietzel of Uppsala University's Department of Materials Science and Engineering.

A great many of the batteries manufactured today have a major environmental impact, not least due to the mining of the metals used in them.

"The point of departure for our research has therefore been to develop a battery built from elements commonly found in nature and that can be used to create organic battery materials," explains Christian Strietzel.

For this reason, the research team has chosen quinones as the active material in their battery. These organic carbon compounds are plentiful in nature, among other things occurring in photosynthesis. The characteristic of quinones that researchers have utilised is their ability to absorb or emit hydrogen ions, which of course only contain protons, during charging and discharging.

An acidic aqueous solution has been used as an electrolyte, the vital component that transports ions inside the battery. As well as being environmentally friendly, this also provides a safe battery free from the hazard of explosion or fire.

"There remains a great deal of further development to be done on the battery before it becomes a household item; however, the proton battery we have developed is a large stride towards being able to manufacture sustainable organic batteries in future," says Christian 

Schematic representation of the all‐organic battery concept, chemical structures/naming and polymerization method. The trimeric precursors (a) were used in the post‐deposition polymerization procedure (b) to form polymers with similar characteristics to those formed from monomeric units. In post‐deposition polymerization, the trimer is first dissolved in an organic electrolyte, followed by drop casting and drying. Subsequently, the trimer film is oxidized, either i) electrochemically in an aqueous 0.5 m H2SO4 solution by cyclic voltammetry between 0.0 and 1.21 V vs. SHE at 10 mV s−1 or by applying a potential of 0.81 V vs. SHE for 3000 s or ii) chemically by immersion into an acidic aqueous solution containing 1 m FeCl3 as oxidant, resulting in the formation of a black polymer layer. The anode material (c) consisted of pEP(NQ)E, which was formed by oxidative polymerization of EP(NQ)E. Similarly, the cathode material pEP(QH2)E (d) was formed from EP(QH2)E. Conductivity was achieved from a polythiophene backbone (e) that was oxidized/doped, for example, with HSO4−. The battery (middle) was assembled as an all‐organic proton battery using 0.5 m H2SO4 (aq) electrolyte, which enabled a rocking‐chair motion of the protons. The anode and cathode redox activity relies on the two‐electron two‐proton (2e2 H) redox process of the pendants (f and g). When the battery is charged, the quinone pendant groups are in the Q and NQH2 states, for the positive electrode (cathode) and negative electrode (anode), respectively. During discharge, the active cathode material is converted to QH2 while the anode is converted to NQ. E=3,4‐ethylenedioxythiophene; NQ=naphthoquinone; NQH2=naphthohydroquinone; P=3,4‐propylenedioxythiophene; p=polymerized; Q=benzoquinone; QH2=hydroquinone. Angewandte Chemie International Edition (2020). DOI: 10.1002/anie.202001191Strietzel.Fast-charging damages electric car batteries

More information: Christian Strietzel et al. An aqueous conducting redox polymer based proton battery that can withstand rapid constant‐voltage charging and sub‐zero temperatures, Angewandte Chemie International Edition (2020). DOI: 10.1002/anie.202001191