Thursday Throughout: No, the Other Simpsons Pandemic Edition
[ThTh1] One of the more frustrating aspects of the pandemic recently has been the effort by the anti-vaxxers to act as if the vaccines are failing. Part of this is sheer disingenuousness. The vaccines are dealing with a variant that didn’t exist a year ago but are still 60% effective in preventing infection and 90% effective in preventing serious illness and death. Had a similar vaccine existed a year ago, 500,000 Americans would still be with us.1
But part of it is due to statistical illusions and particularly one called Simpson’s Paradox. No, this isn’t the paradox of how the TV Simpsons never seem to age; it’s the paradox of what happens when you just mash a bunch of data together without looking deeper into it.
There are several great real-life examples you can find at the link above, but I’ll come up with another one. In my town, we have two schools across the street from each other — the High School and the Delta Program, which follows a different education model. If you measured the average height of students at both schools, the High School students would be taller. This might lead you to conclude that going to the Delta Program makes you shorter.
But you’d be wrong. Because the Delta Program has both a high school and middle school inside it. So you’re comparing a sample of 14-18 year-old kids to a sample of 11-18 year old kids. If you restricted your sample to just the high school kids from Delta, you’d find they have the same average height as the kids in the High School. And the middle school kids would have the same average height as the kids down the road in the Middle School.
This is a subtle bias but one we’ve encountered a lot during the pandemic. And it’s become a recent issues with COVID-19 breakthrough infections among the vaccinated. You might have heard from certain anti-vax types that the Israel data shows that the vaccines are only 60% effective in preventing serious cases instead of 90%. This is not true.
Once you control for age and vaccination rates, it's clear the vaccines are holding up in Israel across both the young and old. pic.twitter.com/NeAksXBroz
— German Lopez (@germanrlopez) August 18, 2021
The data give the illusion that vaccines are less effective because seniors are both more likely to be vaccinated and more likely to get sick. We might actually expect the vaccines to be less effective among the elderly because their immune systems aren’t as strong but there’s no data showing that yet. But when you compare apples to apples — vaccinated old people to unvaccinated old people — the efficacy of the vaccines is clear.
Mark Twain famously said there were lies, damned lies and statistics. But I think P.J. O’Rourke actually put it better. I can’t find the exact quote but it was something about how numbers lie to us with a straight face. And I would say that liars can use numbers to lie to us with a straight face. We live in a world of numbers and they have heft in our debates. But they are easily manipulated, distorted or even just misunderstood by people with an axe to grind. In the future, stats courses will all use examples from the pandemic to illustrate statistical biases.
[ThTh2] The claim is that children born during the pandemic have lower IQs. The response on Twitter was a massive pushback, mostly consisting of snide remarks asking how you measure a baby’s IQ. So what’s the story?
Well, the study, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, comes from a Rhode Island group that does longitudinal studies of child development. With very young children, they are looking at things like speech development and motor skills, which can be kinda sorta distilled into an “IQ” equivalent. What they have found is that children born during the pandemic are trailing older children in the development of early childhood skills, with the decline strongest among males and children of low-income parents.
It’s possible that peer review will find an error in this study but, after skimming through the paper, nothing jumps out at me as particularly egregious. And the conclusions seem … well, kind of reasonable. A lot of families have been under stress during the pandemic. Daycares have been closed. Play dates with other children have been minimal. I think it is not only possible but quite likely we will see the impact of that in the development of children of all ages.
The good news is that children can make up for lost time. IQ, in particular, is extremely fluid at young ages. A a few years ago, my son was diagnosed with mild autism but that was later changed to possible ADHD. In between those two diagnoses, his “IQ” went up by more than 20 points. Not because he got a brain transplant but because he got some help with his development. And it’s never too late for this. In the Blind Side, Michael Oher’s IQ went up almost 25 points to above average after intense tutoring at the age of 17. IQ is not a measure of intelligence; it’s a measure of a specific kind of thinking ability. And in the case of very young children, it’s not even that: it’s a measure of verbal, cognitive and motor development.
The sooner we can get the pandemic under control and get ourselves back to normal life, the more likely it is that children will catch up to a normal development curve. So do not read this headline and think a generation of children are damaged goods. Read this headline and roll up your sleeves. Because there’s going to be a lot of work to do once we’re past this.
[ThTh3] Here’s a good thread on why the argument that “the world’s climate has always changed” isn’t a good rebuttal of global warming. There are also growing concerns over what happens as the permafrost thaws.
[ThTh4] The headlines scream that asteroid Asteroid Bennu could hit the Earth. The reality is that the odds are very low — one in 1750. And it’s not a concern until 2182. And the asteroid’s orbit could just as easily plunge it into the sun or yeet it completely out of the Solar System. Phil Plait has more.
[ThTh5] There’s an old joke that nuclear fusion is always going to be a source of energy ten years from today. But it does seem like we’re getting closer.
[ThTh6] The model we use for our Milky Way Galaxy is that is a grand-design spiral with huge spiral arms sweeping out from the center. That’s accurate. But as we probe our galaxy in greater details, we find that it’s … a bit messy.
[ThTh7] Saturn has a fuzzy core.
[ThTh8] When the mRNA vaccines came out, I predicted they would be revolutionary. Moderna is about to trial a new HIV vaccine.
ThTH8 – I don’t know how revolutionary these really are since they are built on 10 years of research and vaccine testing from the original SARS outbreak. Good to see folks looking around for other ways to apply the technology though.Report
It’s revolutionary in the sense that it’s a significant departure from how we’ve been making vaccines for 100+ years. And it’s the first time the technique has been used on a wide scale and shown efficacy.
Ergo, it may spark a revolution in how we develop vaccines. Imagine if we no longer needed chicken eggs to make the flu vaccine every year.
The fact that it’s been in development for a decade doesn’t really enter into it.Report
One of the real problems we have now is limited manufacturing capability, i.e. that ‘wide scale’ thing.
The world is something like 15% vaccinated. The US is going to have all adults do a boaster (or two, or whatever), which is a big FU to the concept of vaccine equality.
The huge bonus to the flu vaccine would be having one that actually works. There are hundreds of variations on the flu, the CDC basically guesses on which 3 might be around in a year and if (when) they’re wrong we get vaccine(s) that aren’t especially well targeted to that year’s virus.
“Not especially well targeted” is a LOT better than “no vaccine”, but having a specifically targeted vac would be a lot better.Report
FYI: Universal Flu VaccineReport
Moderna, IIRC, is now trialing an HIV vaccine. HIV is a hard darn target, and pretty much the only hope is something like mRNA vaccines.
I suspect vaccines against Herpes (both versions) as well will be entering trials soon.
Even to those who already have the disease, vaccination is likely to heavily arm the immune system — preventing HIV viral loads from rising with less medication, and preventing Herpes outbreaks.
Being able to pinpoint a specific protein on a virus and say “That, that’s the bit you need to recognize and kill” is game changing. Like “invention of antibiotics” game changing.Report
Ah, no. You have the cart before the horse. It’s mRNA technology that’s revolutionary, not the COVID-19 vaccine — or the SARS work before it.
Or rather, finally seeing it in practice.
This stuff is akin to “the invention of antibiotics” in terms of game-changing, and we’re not talking “in theory, in a lab, in a paper somewhere” anymore.
You can use this to program the human immune system to look for something INCREDIBLY specific and kill it.
The human immune system that handles everything from viruses and bacteria to cancer.
And it’s incredibly fast and easy to do. They created the mRNA vaccines in a weekend, needing only the sequenced DNA of COVID-19 to do. And now that we’ve real world results, future vaccines based on this tech will be faster to authorize.
After all, the conspiracy nuts aside, mRNA vaccines are incredibly safe. They’re just mRNA in lipid packets — any that don’t get into a cell and start pumping out their target protein dissolve quickly. No adenoviral vectors that can cause an immune response on it’s own, no immune system coming up with the wrong target on it’s own based on a dead viral sample.
This stuff has the potential to cure HIV, herpes, even a lot of cancers (your immune system ALSO handles cancerous cells, after all). And if you already have HIV or herpes, massively mitigate the outbreaks. No more daily drug regimens as your immune system has been taught exactly how to squash outbreaks effectively.Report
ThTh8: Would mRNA be a useful way to deliver biological drugs at a lower cost, and also perhaps to allow the development of true biological generics that don’t need the lengthy and expensive regulatory process needed for biosimilars?Report
YesReport
ThTh5: It’s interesting to me how we seem to be getting away from fusion that is a “sun in a bottle”, and moving towards a “baby nova in a bottle”.
In either case, I am left wondering how we intend to harvest the energy. Right now, it feels like trying to harvest a lightning strike.Report
Fusion always frustrated me. I mean it’s *points upward* right there. The model is right there. Then I actually learned about stars. It’s so… inelegant. You just pile almost inconceivable amounts of hydrogen into a utterly gigantic heap and gravity does the rest. It’s basically brute force fusion and, obviously, useless for replicating on Earth.Report
I keep telling scientists “figure out gravity and just replicate that” and they’re all like “That’s a lot harder than lasers, mate” and “stop watching star trek” and “How did you even get in here? Why do we even pay for security?” and “Are you wearing a beer hat?”Report
I never understand why they focus so much on the beer hat…Report
Well done, I laughed loudly.Report
Well, since we can’t do gravity, we cheat and use magnetic fields and lasers.
But make no mistake, even if we manage to surpass the break even point enough to generate power, there is still the problem of capturing that power, and the problem of waste heat (I sincerely hope someone is working hard on boosting the efficiency and/or scalability of Seebeck devices).Report
Yeah my gloom around fusion deepens. Too bad too because it’s soooooo cool!Report
Eh, they’ll crack it. Probably long after it’d have been really useful.
We might end up building the stupid things in a century just to handle large-scale desal plants, although some of the tech on those looks to massively reduce energy costs.
It’s getting real hard to compete with “free” when it comes to “what’s your power plant’s feedstock”.
The current bottleneck is storage, but there’s so many ways around that and it’s becoming more and more feasible to build it as solar and wind push more and more cheap energy into the grid.Report
Yeah except for the storage, Ms. Lincoln, how is your renewable power grid workin out?Report
IMHO, the problem with storage is not, “Can we do it?”, it’s that any storage scheme will involve considerable capital costs, and there are so many options right now, and on the immediate horizon, that people are playing a waiting game.
No one wants to be the utility that spends hundreds of millions of dollars digging out a reservoir for pumped hydro, only to have some crazy efficient and affordable battery tech appear 5 years later that would give them the same storage for a fraction of the cost.Report
I’ll defer to your expertise on the matter. It just doesn’t seem like that storage cost is factored into the cheapness of renewables and when you bring up base power questions they shrug and say “we’ll power people on ecological virtue alone if the sun doesn’t shine”.Report
It’s more complicated than that.
Maybe a topic for a Tech Tuesday…Report
Storage is only one way of working the intermittency problem. Unfortunately, it’s the only way the people in charge of reliability for the US power grids seem to want to work with.Report
Would the other way be piping power in from places where the sun is shining/wind is blowing?Report
One way is simply massively overbuilding production capacity and ensuring your grid is geographically “wide” enough, diverse enough, and robust enough.
It might, bluntly, be cheaper than most storage solutions. (Although places where there are already hydro plants should see fairly cheap storage costs).
And renewables really are getting cheap.Report
At some point, in the (probably) not too distant future, photovoltaic panels will be cheap enough and durable enough that even places that aren’t AZ or southern CA will be able to cover every roof with them. At that point, the only major obstacle will be utilities being obstinate and building codes that are written to give electricians the ability to charge extra for something.Report
Down here in Houston they’re surprisingly effective, and the biggest problems are the upfront costs and the fact that builders generally don’t orient roofs with solar in mind.
If you’re lucky, you’ve got a good chunk of roof facing the right way.
We’re considering moving and building a house from scratch (in a few years, not now) and will plan solar, and a south facing roof, from the start.
In all fairness, I’m likely to replace battery storage with an NG generator for blackouts though, and rely on solar to supplement or replace my grid draw on a day to day basis.Report
Having just got back from Hawai’i (and having been there a number of times), the deployment of solar there is astounding. Even the crappiest looking shacks have a PV panel or two on the roof. Which makes sense, given that importing fuel is expensive and all that.Report
I’m waiting for parking lots and parking structures to start building solar roofs. Shade the top level/lot with some solar panels.Report
I regularly drive by a new south-facing apartment building. The “awnings” that shade the windows have PV panels. The covered parking has PV panels on top. I can’t see the roof — five-story building — but am told that it’s got as many PV panels as will comfortably fit.Report
I’m already thinking about it on my south facing roof. Even if we don’t feed back to the grid, it’s getting more and more worth it every year.Report
I’m iffy on whether I’m staying in this house or moving in the next few years, or I’d be considering it.
Right now I’m dealing with my house deciding what it really wants is water damage, and trying it’s hardest to find new ways to leak water into my walls.Report
All your CPVC getting brittle and cracking on you?Report
A combination of factors, starting with a poorly sealed joint in a dehumidifier line that led to a failing shower wall, and of course a stupid AC drain line that won’t stop sweating no matter what I do to the point where I think there’s a crack in it somewhere in the wall….
Could be worse, but it’ll probably cost me upwards of 6k to fix everything.
But in Houston, you can’t really let water damage sit.Report
Well, there’s the National Ignition Facility. Then there’s also, over the last couple of years, the Chinese announcing major development of their own “sun in a bottle” reactor, the Koreans, the Germans, and of course ITER continues on its merry way.
And of course none of them have actually demonstrated the ability to capture the kinetic energy of the neutrons produced in the reactions to heat a medium and actually drive a turbine. That’s the experimental result I’m waiting to hear: breakeven between the energy put into the reaction(s) and energy captured in a working fluid.Report
Exactly, it can’t just be energy in < energy out, it has to be energy in <<< energy out*. *For those who are symbolically challenged, energy in has to be a significant order of magnitude less than the energy out, because entropy is a persistent bastard and we will never capture all the energy of the reaction.Report
Apropos of today. Report
ThTh1 seems to me like we are really in a pinch between the anti-vaxxers and the vaccine theater types pushing for a return to strict social distancing and making mandates. Both are using the same information and operating from the same premise: the vaccines don’t work. Of course the data keeps showing over and over again that it is an excellent and easy mitigator.Report
THTh5: I remember HUGE excitement when the news of “cold fusion” came out in the late 80s (in fact, I remember my organic chem lab prof talking about it, I remember thinking “wow this could change everything for the better”). I remember my prof talking about how maybe a trashcan sized fusion reactor could provide all the power a household would ever need….
then it came out that that study at least, was fraud. Probably should have primed me for the next 30 or so years…
I do think controllable fusion might be the game changer in terms of clean, cheaper energy, but I’m not holding my breath.Report
Don’t hold your breath, and as I say far too often, don’t delay getting rid of fossil fuels waiting for fusion either. I also add that in a warming world, thermal power plants of any sort are not necessarily a good idea. Southern Company has spent billions converting their thermal plants in the US Southeast from pass-through to consumptive cooling because they were making the rivers too warm. During the last big Texas drought a decade or so ago, the state had to throttle back the nukes near Dallas because the cooling pond was too warm.Report
Water is a great working fluid because it’s so abundant.
But it’s not really the best working fluid for spinning turbines.Report
No matter what the working fluid is, all the various power cycles include some sort of cooler for the working fluid. For closed cycles, the most common is a heat exchanger that transfers heat to water (which is then circulated or evaporated to transport the heat away). That’s the water use that’s causing problems.Report
Sure, but how much heat do you need to bleed off through the cold exchanger from the working fluid before it can return the hot exchanger?
One of the reasons modern plants have to move so much heat away is because we don’t really have an economical way to extract the heat energy remaining in the water, and the boiler needs to have a supply side at a specific temperature or the efficiency starts to tank.
Ideally, we need a working fluid that leaves the turbine as close to the optimum return temp as possible, or we need something else to extract the heat energy for use (rather than just dumping it to the environment).
Or we need a way to dump the heat outside of the environment*.
*PS There is a group in CA testing this out as an AC system for a store. Can’t recall if it’s this polymer exactly, but it’s the same concept.Report
Sure, but how much heat do you need to bleed off through the cold exchanger from the working fluid before it can return the hot exchanger?
Consider a typical commercial fission power plant today. 30% of the heat is converted to electricity. Maybe 5% goes into heat in other ways. 65% of the heat gets dumped through the condenser (assuming steam turbines). Palo Verde in Arizona during the summer evaporates an acre-foot of water every five minutes dumping waste heat.
When Fort St. Vrain nuclear was running in Colorado, with the helium at an exit temperature of ~1400 °F, it had almost 40% heat to electricity. Still more than half of the reactor heat was simply dumped.
The best thermal plants we have today are combined-cycle gas-fired. We are approaching 60% of the heat to electricity in those and 35% dumped out the condensers for the steam portion of the cycle.
The DOE is sponsoring a small modular reactor plant at the INL in Idaho. It is only feasible because the federal government is able to preemptively take (ie, pay nothing for the rights) Snake River water.Report
You aren’t telling me anything I don’t know (we studied the various heat cycles pretty in-depth in Thermo).
Let’s get back to the problem at hand, thermal power production has to dump heat. We call it waste heat, because we are wasting it. This isn’t loss due to pumps, or valves, or pipe friction, it’s just heat we don’t have an economical way to harvest. When I was in the Navy, waste heat was a huge concern, in that we really did not want to waste the heat from the turbines. We had waste heat boilers and other things in the exhaust stacks just so we could capture that heat and use it, and also to reduce the thermal bloom 4 massive turbines create.
But that was the Navy.
Fusion power will ratchet this problem up… I don’t know how many orders of magnitude. If we manage to get a viable plant running, we may stop emitting CO2, but still warm the world just by having to dump the waste heat.
So we either have to figure out how to economically harvest the waste heat, or we need a way to get it off planet. But we can’t just keep dumping it to the oceans or atmosphere.Report
Detroit Edison Nuclear Power and BakeryReport
You joke, but using the waste heat to drive an industrially useful endothermic reaction is one option.
Just gotta find enough useful endothermic reactions…Report
Pittsburgh Energy, Steel, Autoclave, and Medical Waste Destruction.
(Why isn’t turning more water into steam to turn more turbines more attractive, again? Is there a hard limit of the useful number of turning turbines?)Report
You should look at a cross section of a steam turbine sometime, the last few rows of blades are very long, which means the turbine has extracted as much energy as is economically efficient; i.e. diminishing returns, another stage of even longer blades will simply result in an even more expensive turbine, for little gain, if not a loss of efficiency (it takes more energy to turn the last row of blades than can be extracted from the steam).
There is still heat in that steam, or the water that typically starts to condense out by that point, but a turbine is no longer an economical way to extract the energy. Without some other work for it to do, all you can do it cool it down to the temperature the boiler needs at the input for it’s maximum efficiency.Report
So there’s no room for another turbine entirely? There’s extra heat but not a turbine’s worth?Report
Room in the physical sense?
But yes, there is extra heat, but not a turbine wheels worth of it.Report
So a lot of heat left over but not enough for it to be useful for the job that is already going on.
Ugh.Report
This problem is inherent in every heat cycle, be it steam, gas turbine, piston engine, etc. There is considerable heat left over after the work is done that has to be discarded because capturing it in some other way is too expensive. That is why the efficiency rarely breaks 50%.Report
Denver, CO has the longest continuously operating district-heating system in the world. Something over 120 buildings in downtown get their heat from the steam pipes. For many many years, the steam was a byproduct of the Zuni Generating Station.Report
Not sure if it’s still doing this, but UW-Madison has a coal fired power plant on campus (rail line runs right to it and it has an impressive coal yard). The waste steam was pumped to a number of nearby campus buildings for winter heat.Report
Ann Arbor’s UofMich used to do this. Might still.
Supposedly the dorms had to pay according to the amount of heat they were NOT using… so when the students weren’t there the dorm would crank up the heat.
The years I was there, over winter break we had issues with turn-top records breaking and candles melting. I told a few people to crack their windows open when they went home.Report
City of Angels, Eight Cylinder Radial Steam Powered Aelectric Generator
https://www.instagram.com/p/COG1o6WMXu5/Report
Aelectric?Report
“During the last big Texas drought a decade or so ago, the state had to throttle back the nukes near Dallas because the cooling pond was too warm.”
Fun fact, while our government was blaming wind for the grid shutdown during the Texas freeze, the nuclear plants had to shut down.
Their turbines weren’t weather protected and couldn’t handle the cold.Report
THTH1: The implication of including the omitted variable (age as known significant risk factor) is that there does not appear to be any waning of the vaccines. 81.1% to 100.0% efficacy against severe disease is well within the expected range of vaccine efficacy upon full vaccination. The analysis did not break out another known risk factor, various pre-existing conditions. Almost certainly the appearance of waning efficacy is driven by the fact that those at greatest risk from COVID (either at risk of infection or severe disease) were vaccinated earliest.Report
ThTh2 is a little bit of a “No duh.” I mean, we have a cohort children who’s first 3/6/9/12/18 months on Earth were unlike any other cohort’s over the last century and we’re surprised that they’re exhibiting differences? I’d be shocked if they weren’t! As you said, what matters most is how we respond. We have tons of evidence of how to help kids overcome early obstacles in their development and hopefully we put all that to good use in the coming months and years. So, we need to roll up our sleeves to get that happening as soon as possible and make sure it happens as thoroughly as possible.Report
Both my brother (b. 1974) and his kid (b. 2012) caused minor alarm from pediatricians because they were slow to talk, and from teachers, because they were slow to read.
they caught up (Well, my niece is still catching up on reading, but she’s getting better at it; she has the added difficulty of the terrible eyesight some of us have). I don’t like how sometimes parents are unnecessarily panicked that they’re doing something wrong because their child just has their own timetable for stuff.
It’s not like any of us humans need more stress during this time, or parents who have parented through a decidedly unfavorable climate for parenting to feel like they failed.Report
There’s this weird phenomenon where we vacillate between stigmatizing developmental differences and over diagnosing differences as disorders. We can’t seem to find a balance between, “You shouldn’t panic if your kid is on a different pathway. It may self-correct and/or can be supported through non-invasive, proven approaches,” and “Everyone gets an SLP/OT recommendation.”Report
IMHO it’s a problem if my kid isn’t at LEAST average (and ideally she should be one of the better kids in the class).
Part of this is positional. Part is it builds self confidence. Part is I don’t trust the teachers happy talk that everyone is a winner; Elementary school rules don’t last beyond elementary school.
My experience has been that the school system drops the ball every now and then. My job as parent is to step in when that happens.Report
I think it is confluence of the ancient problem of parents not accepting their children for who they are rather than who we wish they were, and the medicalization of behavior and personality.
In the pre-medical era it was just accepted that some people just had quirky personalities, oddities that caused them to be just a bit different than most other people. Now there is a desire to establish some ideal norm of behavior and development and see anything else as a medical problem to be fixed.Report
+1 to you.
We have fewer paths forward to success.
“Fixing” ADHD means a big difference on the SAT and probably high school GPA. That means a better college, or even better, a bigger scholarship.Report