Month: December 2020

Enlarge (credit: Tracy J. Lee | Getty Images)

Michael Williams' every move was being tracked without his knowledge—even before the fire. In August, Williams, an associate of R&B star and alleged rapist R. Kelly, allegedly used explosives to destroy a potential witness’s car. When police arrested Williams, the evidence cited in a Justice Department affidavit was drawn largely from his smartphone and online behavior: text messages to the victim, cell phone records, and his search history.

The investigators served Google a “keyword warrant,” asking the company to provide information on any user who had searched for the victim’s address around the time of the arson. Police narrowed the search, identified Williams, then filed another search warrant for two Google accounts linked to him. They found other searches: the “detonation properties” of diesel fuel, a list of countries that do not have extradition agreements with the US, and YouTube videos of R. Kelly’s alleged victims speaking to the press. Williams has pleaded not guilty.

Enlarge (credit: Flickr)

Early in 2020, I wrote about my experiences of moving to online learning: learning to use new tools, changing the way I taught, and dealing with the challenges of remote assessment. Sitting, unmentioned in the background, was the fact that the faculty where I teach had already agreed to revamp our electrical engineering curriculum, which directs the lives of students during three of their four years here. This raised a rather critical question: do we stick with the old in these trying times, or forge ahead with something new? In the end, we decided that we would press on with the new.

Then, just to add to the confusion, management decided that we should have two student intakes: one in August/September (the traditional starting time for new students), and one in February. This meant that, if we were fast enough, we could trial the new curriculum on a small group of students that started in February, rather than jumping in the deep end in September. After a lot of work, and with much material still to be developed, we think we are ready to roll.

One of the best parts of developing the new curriculum has been the criticism and feedback we’ve had from colleagues, students, and alumni. Now, with a month to go before we'll be using the new curriculum, I want to open it up to critique by you, the Ars readers. I’m ready to be the Christmas roast.

Enlarge / Oxford University is associated with the hospital that ran this study, as well as a vaccine that is currently undergoing clinical trials. (credit: Gallo Images)

The two authorizations issued by the FDA for COVID-19 vaccines come because of clear data that they limit infections by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and ensure that any ensuing cases are mild. Studies have also indicated that the vaccine triggers the development of antibodies specific to the virus. Oddly, however, we don't have good data on an obvious question: is there a causal relationship between the two? In other words, we haven't determined whether production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is a necessary step towards providing protection, or how long that protection lasts.

The have been a few small studies that hint at answers to these key questions, but significant uncertainties have remained. Now, a massive study out of Oxford University Hospital provides a clear indication that high levels of antibodies are protective. But, even with 12,500 participants, the study doesn't eliminate the uncertainties.

The good news

To get some good numbers, Oxford University Hospital tested its entire staff of healthcare workers, both for the presence of viral RNA, and for antibodies that indicated a past exposure to the virus. Following the initial tests, all the staff had the option of being retested for the presence of virus every two weeks, and antibodies every two months. Testing started back in April, when the first wave of infections was still happening, and continued through the end of November, when the second wave was still building. While many of the hospital staff were busy enough that they took longer than two weeks for follow-up testing, the hospital was able to track over 12,500 people.