@mista98berk @chiiki_i @RhondaMoskowitz @DrEliDavid I'm seeing it where the US rapidly vaccinated 60% of its population and almost entirely blocked the alpha surge that hit most of the world (slower to vaccinate) and then got cases down to 10k which never otherwise happened. +NO superspreader anywhere w/vax passes before delta.

@mista98berk@chiiki\u i@RhondaMoskowitz@DrEliDavid我看到，美国迅速为60%的人口接种了疫苗，几乎完全阻止了袭击世界大多数地区的甲型流感激增（接种速度较慢），然后将病例减少到1万例，这是从未发生过的+在delta之前的任何位置，都没有vax通过的superspreader。

@chiiki_i @mista98berk @RhondaMoskowitz @DrEliDavid They prevented infection. That's why cases in the US went down to 10k, a level that was never seen before or since.
This was proven in a very careful study of healthcare workers who were tested every week. Vaccinated were infected 90% less than unvaccinated.

@chiiki\u i@mista98berk@RhondaMoskowitz@DrEliDavid他们阻止了感染。这就是为什么美国的病例下降到10公里，这是以前或以后从未见过的水平。
这一点在对每周接受检测的医护人员进行的一项非常仔细的研究中得到了证实。接种疫苗的感染率比未接种疫苗的低90%。

@chiiki_i @mista98berk @RhondaMoskowitz @DrEliDavid I can't tell you why they're called breakthrough, I don't know the history of the term. Unvaccinated were barred from public events because vaccinated transmitted a lot less (not zero). Over time that declined and most of those mandates went away. Seems reasonable to me.

@chiiki\u i@mista98berk@RhondaMoskowitz@DrEliDavid我不能告诉你为什么他们被称为突破，我不知道这个词的历史。未接种疫苗的人被禁止参加公共活动，因为接种疫苗的人传播更少（不是零）。随着时间的推移，这种情况有所下降，大多数授权都消失了。对我来说似乎很合理。

@mista98berk @chiiki_i @RhondaMoskowitz @DrEliDavid Check the dates. It all happened in the sequence I described.

@mista98berk@chiiki\u i@RhondaMoskowitz@DrEliDavid检查日期。这一切都是按照我描述的顺序发生的。

@wanderer_jasnah @BallouxFrancois On another point, I'm calling it Omi from now on. Not only is that a cute nickname, but it saves twitter chars.

@Wanderr\u jasnah@BallouxFrancois关于另一点，从现在起我称之为Omi。这不仅是一个可爱的昵称，而且还节省了推特用户的时间。

@WestOfMichael @Teri_Kanefield Apart from what he was doing (suspicious) his mannerism were also suspicious AF. They're lying.

@WestOfMichael@Teri\u Kanefield除了他所做的（可疑）之外，他的行为举止也可疑。他们在撒谎。

@greg_travis @DrJBhattacharya @maya_chavez_ Parents were the ones going out to essential work, or for necessities. Kids were at home. Guess who infects whom....shocker!
Nice propaganda work Jay. Must pay well.

@格雷格·特拉维斯（greg\u travis）@DrJBhattacharya（DrJBhattacharya）@maya\u chavez\u父母是外出从事基本工作或购买必需品的人。孩子们在家。猜猜谁感染了谁。。。。令人震惊！
很好的宣传工作，杰伊。你必须付得起。

@greg_travis @DrJBhattacharya @maya_chavez_ So you know that study from Iceland he's quoting, where kids didn't transmit to parents? Guess what, schools were closed. https://t.co/fK0VAu61qA

@greg\u travis@DrJBhattacharya@maya\u chavez\u你知道他引用的冰岛的研究，那里的孩子没有向父母传播？你猜怎么着，学校都关门了。https://t.co/fK0VAu61qA

@wanderer_jasnah @BallouxFrancois Right, so "better"?

@Wanderr\u jasnah@BallouxFrancois对，那么“更好”？

@greg_travis @DrJBhattacharya @maya_chavez_ We don't understand it but we're going to assume it's true because we want it to be true. Or maybe we just want YOU to think it's true.

@格雷格·特拉维斯（greg\u travis）@DrJBhattacharya（DrJBhattacharya）@maya\u chavez\u我们不理解，但我们会假设这是真的，因为我们希望它是真的。或者我们只是想让你认为这是真的。

@jmcrookston Report for ban evasion

@jmcrookston逃禁报告

@MichaelSFuhrer @antizeroalt @Backtotravel22 I'm not aware of any covid studies finding zero, but maybe they're out there. Denmark found a small, not statistically significant, but positive effect, but only on the wearer, ignoring source control/transmission. Implied community effect would be larger.

@MichaelSFuhrer@antizeroalt@Backtotravel22我不知道有任何新冠病毒研究发现零，但也许他们在那里。丹麦发现了一个小的，没有统计意义的，但积极的影响，但只对佩戴者，忽略了源控制/传输。隐含的社区效应会更大。

@MichaelSFuhrer @antizeroalt @Backtotravel22 Bangladesh found about 10% with about 50% usage IIRC.
There are a least two others, one recent. All in the same ballpark. Obviously not a precise number, but reasonable ballpark.

@MichaelSFuhrer@antizeroalt@Backtotravel22 Bangladesh发现约10%的人使用IIRC，约50%的人使用IIRC。
至少还有两个，一个是最近的。都在同一个球场上。很明显，这不是一个精确的数字，但大致合理。

@MichaelSFuhrer @antizeroalt @Backtotravel22 20% is a best estimate supported by multiple studies, it's not really optimistic. Of course, getting 100% of people using masks is "optimistic".
I think the 7% is in line with what was claimed in the article. Maybe a bit different with different assumptions from yours.

@MichaelSFuhrer@antizeroalt@Backtotravel22 20%是得到多项研究支持的最佳估计，这并不乐观。当然，让100%的人使用口罩是“乐观的”。
我认为7%与文章中所声称的相符。可能与你的假设有点不同。

@Backtotravel22 @MichaelSFuhrer Right, that's why I said implausibly. 20% is everyone using masks as people realistically use them around the world (e.g. not in pubs, etc.)

@Backtotravel22@MichaelSFuhrer对，这就是为什么我说得难以置信。20%的人都在使用口罩，因为全世界的人都在实际使用口罩（例如，不在酒吧等）

@Backtotravel22 @MichaelSFuhrer The 20% includes all that. If you (implausibly) actually had people in good masks used correctly 100% of the time, it would be much more than 20% reduction.

@Backtotravel22@MichaelSFuhrer 20%包括所有这些。如果你（难以置信地）真的让戴着好面具的人100%的时间都正确使用，那将大大减少20%以上。

@antizeroalt @Backtotravel22 @MichaelSFuhrer Agree, 100% use rate is very hard. But with air quality, I don't know, maybe possible. Maybe better is possible. Nobody knows, I think.

@antizeroalt@Backtotravel22@MichaelSFuhrer同意，100%的使用率非常困难。但就空气质量而言，我不知道，也许是可能的。也许更好是可能的。我想没人知道。

@antizeroalt @Backtotravel22 @MichaelSFuhrer That's not "everywhere", it's based on a few studies of community mask use, which includes not using them for hospitality (nobody does, obviously).

@antizeroalt@Backtotravel22@MichaelSFuhrer这并不是“无处不在”，这是基于对社区面具使用的一些研究，其中包括不使用面具招待客人（显然没有人这样做）。

@Dave99117584 @wanderer_jasnah @BallouxFrancois Right, they're all protected against severe disease which is why we see relatively little severe disease out of 25k. So numbers become low and hard to give high-confidence conclusions out of the few that still leak through.

@Dave99117584@Loverer\u jasnah@BallouxFrancois对，它们都能抵御严重疾病，这就是为什么我们在25k中看到相对较少的严重疾病。所以，数字变得很低，很难从少数仍在泄漏的数据中得出高置信度的结论。

@Backtotravel22 @MichaelSFuhrer That's about what masks do if you can get everyone to use them. Maybe a bit more with higher quality masks. If you add air quality, can probably do better, or do with less mask wearing.

@Backtotravel22@MichaelSFuhrer这是关于面具的作用，如果你能让每个人都使用它们。也许有更高质量的面具。如果你增加空气质量，可能会做得更好，或者少戴口罩。