@EthicsElizabeth @jfeldman_epi Almost anyone (with any form of private insurance or medicare and some with medicaid) can eight free (at point of sale) or reimbursed tests per month. But this probably isn't as widely publicized as it could be.
@EthicsElizabeth @jfeldman_epi 几乎任何人（有任何形式的私人保险或医疗保险，有些有医疗补助）每月都可以免费（在销售点）或报销八次测试。但这可能没有得到广泛宣传。
@jfeldman_epi Part of the the reason is likely the reimbursement scheme the Biden administration set up and never reexamined. Almost anyone can buy tests for up to $12/each and get fully reimbursed.
@jfeldman_epi 部分原因可能是拜登政府制定的报销计划，从未重新审查过。几乎任何人都可以以最高 12 美元/每个的价格购买测试并获得全额报销。
@Daniseberini @CoinDesk @FrederickMunawa It's complicated. On a public blockchain everyone can see every one of your transactions, unlike conventional payment systems. If you don't want every single one of your transitions to be fully public, even if not illicit, you need some sort of privacy via technology.
@Daniseberini @CoinDesk @FrederickMunawa 这很复杂。与传统支付系统不同，在公共区块链上，每个人都可以看到您的每一笔交易。如果您不希望您的每一次转换都完全公开，即使不是非法的，您也需要通过技术获得某种隐私。
@TimothyPSmith7 @itshullabalulu @EnemyInAState Yes the time factor is a big part of why most people supposedly "vaccinated" have only had one dose. 28 day interval plus additional for full vaccine response, plus some second doses delayed/denied to stretch supply. Considering trajectory of outbreak/vaxing, very few there yet.
@TimothyPSmith7 @itshullabalulu @EnemyInAState 是的，时间因素是大多数人所谓的“接种疫苗”只接种一剂的重要原因。 28 天间隔加上额外的完全疫苗反应，加上一些第二剂延迟/拒绝以延长供应。考虑到爆发/流行的轨迹，目前还很少。
@TimothyPSmith7 @itshullabalulu @EnemyInAState Using the intradermal method the dose is indeed reduced to 1/5, so 5x increase in supply. But still need two shots.
https://www.fda.gov/news-event... https://t.co/lxi1v8gHQZ
@TimothyPSmith7 @itshullabalulu @EnemyInAState 使用皮内方法，剂量确实减少到 1/5，因此供应量增加了 5 倍。但是还是需要打两针。
https://www.fda.gov/news-event... https://t.co/lxi1v8gHQZ
@i_petersen @ZerocovidD @_TheAncientOne_ Have you? For example, ventilation. It is widely recognized that transmission outdoors is very low, arguably negligible. Clearly ventilation can have a large effect.
"Masks" (i.e. hodgepodge of mostly shitty community masks) are likely around 20%, not the entire cheese stack.
@i_petersen @ZerocovidD @_TheAncientOne_ 你有吗？例如，通风。人们普遍认为，户外传播非常低，可以说可以忽略不计。显然，通风可以产生很大的影响。
“面具”（即大多数糟糕的社区面具的大杂烩）可能在 20% 左右，而不是整个奶酪堆。
@alexgarcia_atx Jobs was an amazing pitch man, but the #1 thing that made the iPhone a hit was being an extension of the already-hit iPod. People had the choice of iPod plus another phone or one iPhone. Leveraging advantages a big part of marketing. so this is not anti-Jobs at all.
@alexgarcia_atx 乔布斯是一个了不起的推销员，但是
@i_petersen @SuzieSm28138769 You're still arguing against the strawman of masks being a 'silver bullet'.
Masks aren't the only available measure (in fact not even the only measure present now) and the combined effect of multiple measures with individual small effect is not necessarily small.
@i_petersen @SuzieSm28138769 你还在争论口罩的稻草人是“银弹”。
口罩不是唯一可用的措施（实际上甚至不是现在唯一的措施），多个措施与个别小影响的综合影响不一定很小。
@i_petersen @crystalmundypsy You can't support that the two are related in any way, or even that encouraging people to think and act like the pandemic is over (e.g. by abandoning masks), doesn't end up discouraging vaccine uptake.
@i_petersen @crystalmundypsy 你不能支持这两者有任何关系，甚至不能鼓励人们像大流行已经结束一样思考和行动（例如通过放弃口罩），最终不会阻止疫苗的吸收。
@AusThinkingGirl @taipan168 @covidtweets Every society that undertook mitigation in 2020 could have changed course at any point if vaccines became less likely. That never happened. At every step vaccine progress was favorable, and timeline was maintained or accelerated. That certainly informed policies.
@AusThinkingGirl @taipan168 @covidtweets 如果疫苗变得不太可能，每个在 2020 年采取缓解措施的社会都可能随时改变路线。从未发生过。疫苗的每一步进展都是有利的，时间线保持或加快。这肯定会通知政策。