Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Use Wireless To Study How Flu Spreads
MojoKid writes "With the help of wireless sensors, Stanford researchers confirmed what most of us suspected. When it comes to infectious viruses, human beings are toast. The researchers outfitted an entire high school population with IEEE 802.15.4 sensors for one day to model what they call a 'human contact network.' The devices tracked how often people came within the infection-spreading range of other individuals during a typical height-of-flu-season January day. The devices logged more than 760,000 incidents when two people were within 10 feet of each other, roughly the maximum distance that a disease can be transmitted through a cough or sneeze, according to a Stanford report on the project. The researchers ran thousands of simulations of a flu outbreak trying to determine infection rates under various circumstances."
I was under the impression that flu was also spread by a carrier touching a surface, then someone else touching it, then touching his eyes or mouth. And if people aren't sneezing/coughing like crazy, I would expect this shared-surfaces issue to be the dominant way the flu is spread.
If I'm right, wouldn't their approach have a serious problem getting data on these shared-surface transmissions?
Hey, if you can verb a noun, then you can noun an adjective.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
High school students are generally a lot more sociable than the general population. Outfit a large office building with these same sensors, and I bet you get different results.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Speaking as someone who hasn't been sick since 2006 and I NEVER get a stupid flu shot, you may be on to something there. Part of it is to not bother with medications and having a superior immune system untouched by anti-bacterial products. That and a complete belief that I cannot get sick anymore. That's all it takes. A strong will and immune system that gets exposed to all sorts of real-world bacteria and flu bugs is all you need. Stop getting sick, you weak fucktards!
This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/08/1009094108.abstract?sid=8b3f6e2c-94b3-4175-903a-5d75382af4fd
Abstract:
The most frequent infectious diseases in humans—and those with the highest potential for rapid pandemic spread—are usually transmitted via droplets during close proximity interactions (CPIs). Despite the importance of this transmission route, very little is known about the dynamic patterns of CPIs. Using wireless sensor network technology, we obtained high-resolution data of CPIs during a typical day at an American high school, permitting the reconstruction of the social network relevant for infectious disease transmission. At 94% coverage, we collected 762,868 CPIs at a maximal distance of 3 m among 788 individuals. The data revealed a high-density network with typical small-world properties and a relatively homogeneous distribution of both interaction time and interaction partners among subjects. Computer simulations of the spread of an influenza-like disease on the weighted contact graph are in good agreement with absentee data during the most recent influenza season. Analysis of targeted immunization strategies suggested that contact network data are required to design strategies that are significantly more effective than random immunization. Immunization strategies based on contact network data were most effective at high vaccination coverage. /p?
As above.
The only time I've heard it used as one is to refer to an AM radio, by old people.
I'll get off your lawn now.
In the sentence "I like wireless.", "wireless" is a noun. Therefore, "wireless" is a noun.
Words don't have divine and immutable parts of speech or any other linguistic feature somehow ingrained in the fabric of the universe. "Wireless" can plop down in any open class position (noun, verb, adjective, adverb). It is even welcome to be a closed class word (determiner, pronoun, conjunction, etc) if we decide to start using it as such. "Wireless" can also be spoken with a "Z" at the end, or by dropping the first letter ("W"). In other words, we can do whatever we want so long as our speaking partner understands what we are doing.
As a brilliant man said a very long time ago "The meaning of a word is its use in the language".
If you have noticed people annoyed by you in person when you say stuff like what you have posted here, it is because *you* are the one violating a norm by suggesting we cannot use language however we please. This norm is implicit in humans interaction and people are right to roll their eyes when you're around.
Yes, IAAL. (I am a linguist)
As a brilliant man said a very long time ago "The meaning of a word is its use in the language".
OK, my reply is going to be off topic, but your comment quoted above reminded me of an argument I had with some friends.
I had one friend who had started dating a mildly religious women who didn't like cussing, so he was working to cut cuss words out of his speech. He would sometimes use silly or weird words in their replacement, such as "ferk" in lieu of "fuck" if he accidentally hurt himself, for example.
My argument was that he was *still* cussing, despite the change in word. The new stand-in word retained the original meaning, use, and inflection and was understood by all as a replacement for the original word. Therefore, it was still cussing.
Many of my friends did not agree with my assertion.
As a linguist, I would be interested in your take.
I always thought much the same for the people who throw in an asterisk rather than typing the word verbatim. Either say it or don't (and for those sites with profanity filters, either allow it or don't), don't say 'f*ck' and pretend it's any different to saying 'fuck'.
I always found that to be completely pointless, as well. Its meaning is still the same, and it's used in the exact same circumstances as the swear word they're replacing. That said, getting offended by mere words is just idiotic, I think. People use the argument that swear words were intended to be offensive, but not only are they mere words, but you have no obligation to be offended by them. It's ultimately your own fault if you get offended. People need to get out of their little bubbles and toughen up.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
In the sentence "I like wireless.", "wireless" is a noun.
Pardon, but I'm pretty sure that that sentence is implying an unstated noun that is obvious given the context, much like the sentence "I will." which has no predicate at all. Wireless is still an adjective, but it is standing in for a complete phrase. If you were talking about car paint jobs and said, "I like red", red would be an adjective ("I like red paint jobs") not a noun ("I like the color red (in general)."). Or in this case specifically, "I like wireless (communications)" does not necessarily imply that wireless is itself a noun, it's just standing in for the understood phrase.
I am, however, NOT a linguist.
Not sure why this was modded funny. I also opt to skip the flu shot. My wife and kids still get them. She insisted on getting the H1N1 shot when it became available. She then contracted H1N1 despite the vaccination and I remained healthy and unaffected. It's not a difficult concept: feed your body what you need to stay healthy and it will (usually) take care of itself.
This is an interesting question which I myself have puzzled over more than once. The explanation I am going to give you is one that is not based on any clear vein of research, so take it for what it is worth.
"Cussing" is making use of linguistic forms which have been deemed taboo. Whether or not you are cussing, in my opinion, depends upon whether or not you are violating a taboo from the perspective of yourself or your speaking partner. I could see the argument of justification for your friend going either way (he is mapping to the same concept which is itself taboo) or (the concept is not taboo only the word). If your friend honestly doesn't feel as if he is cussing then, to him, he is not cussing. He might be to you, or to others, depending upon what exactly each person has decided is the thing which is taboo.
In my opinion he is still "cussing" by doing this replacement but the fact that uptight sensors on stations like FOX let this stuff through is evidence that not everyone agrees.
Basically, I suppose it depends on what you think cussing *is*. There is quite a large body of work on it but I regret that I have no experience with it. Sorry about that.
Yes, these days it's tons of bullshit until you get to the real thing. Everything above the actual study is going to be full of infantile jokes and idiotic observations, as you've noted (personally it makes me sick to read any modern news articles, or much of anything, due to this). Here's the path I followed to get to the actual study:
Slashdot summary -> Hot Hardware version -> Stanford's news release about study -> Abstract of study -> Study itself (PDF).
In the study, they use the detailed interaction data to try various infection parameters, to see how it spreads. There are many interesting graphs, showing how it spreads in the various scenarios, and where there are sudden changes in how it spreads. They look at different vaccination strategies to see which are most effective.