[Snorlax94]

I don’t know that I would call it a game changer, but it would make it much easier to control if you can figure out what leads to a superspreading event and stop it.  If, on the hand, there is no patter pun to the superspreading events, then your approach to limiting spread would be the same.

BC

What is a patter pun? (I am guessing you are using a smartphone that’s auto-“correcting” pattern?)

To me, if superspreaders alone counted for 80% of cases, that alone is an actionable pattern. It puts more weight on limiting even medium-sized gatherings and because several super spreaders were symptomatic (including the choir singer in Seattle, the church member in Daegu, the tech worker in Seattle...), it puts more emphasis on screening people anywhere people gather (mall and workplace entrances). It’s sad to think if the R0 was 3, then it could be .6 if we could just stop the symptomatic superspreaders from going to work, the festival or church.

[Snorlax94]

I don’t know that I would call it a game changer, but it would make it much easier to control if you can figure out what leads to a superspreading event and stop it.  If, on the hand, there is no patter pun to the superspreading events, then your approach to limiting spread would be the same.

BC

What is a patter pun? (I am guessing you are using a smartphone that’s auto-“correcting” pattern?)

To me, if superspreaders alone counted for 80% of cases, that alone is an actionable pattern. It puts more weight on limiting even medium-sized gatherings and because several super spreaders were symptomatic (including the choir singer in Seattle, the church member in Daegu, the tech worker in Seattle...), it puts more emphasis on screening people anywhere people gather (mall and workplace entrances). It’s sad to think if the R0 was 3, then it could be .6 if we could just stop the symptomatic superspreaders from going to work, the festival or church.