ask-an-epidemiologist

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Hi!! I saw you’re not super active anymore but if you see this, I was hoping to ask you some stuff about being an epidemiologist! I’m in undergrad for biochem right now and ideally I wanna work at the CDC, which obviously lately isn’t looking too great right now :( I wanted to ask, are there any fields within or related to epidemiology that are really math heavy? I really love math and something I’ve been looking at is computational biology, idk if it’s right for me though

Sorry about that! I just have a lot going on and there wasn't a whole lot of activity on this blog so I decided to table it while I was busy.

All of epi is VERY math-heavy, really, but if math is your candy, you will enjoy a concentration in biostats far more than epi. ANOVA and ANCOVAs, multiple linear regressions, coding in SAS and Stata... you'll be playing with numbers a lot, and there's a fair bit of crossover with epi as well.

I do have to say though, and it breaks my heart to do this... but I kind of have to recommend against getting any public health degree in the USA right now. The job market is not there, and what few jobs there are are getting gobbled up (understandably) by displaced government workers. It's expensive to get a degree- even a TAship doesn't always help. You'll end up with all the debt of a grad student but no opportunity for what should be a highly prized, skilled career. If you want any chance at all of getting employed, you need to get a DrPH, but guess what? Those almost universally require a few years of worked experience after getting your MPH. That leaves a PhD, but those are still quite different to a DrPH, and are highly stressful, and that still gives you just a good chance of getting employed, not a guarantee.

I don't know what the landscape looks like for biochem, but I'd recommend staying with that, or maybe crossing over to chemical engineering or similar. Or some sort of applied math if you're really great at complex math. The entire public health sphere is imploding because of the bastard-in-chief and it will take decades to recover, if it ever does.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Let's make an AU of Don't Look Up.

In this Alternate Universe, let's work on the premise that there had been another giant meteor 20-30 years before the one that would take out humanity in the movie. When that meteor came, though, everyone had banded together to destroy the meteor; news stations covered its approach nonstop and panels of experts were convened, and listened to, to find the best way forward. With everyone's help, the meteor was destroyed.

Then come the events of Don't Look Up, with everything else the same for the most part; the experts are still dismissed and mocked. But the memory of how it used to be is still there to haunt them and twist the knife, and also, even worse, the past meteor is cited as proof the current batch of scientists are overreacting. "We had a meteor once and everyone was fine." "Remember all those scientists in the 80s who panicked about the meteor, but now we're totally fine? What liars scientists are."

The only fault of these scientists, of course, was doing their job too well; by preventing suffering, they led to the populace not quite grasping how severe the threat had been, letting them downplay it in future. But what else could have been done? Let the meteor crash back then? Who could have guessed that saving the public from the meteor back then would end up being one part of the chain of events that would make people apathetic to their death by meteor this time?

Anyway, just like Don't Look Up itself, this AU is actually our current reality, as any climate/atmospheric scientist who studied the ozone layer, or any public health professional who knows the history of vaccines, can both tell you.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

I am terrified for the future of epidemiology and public health under Trump.

This is going to cost us either our jobs or ethics or both, it will cost the public their lives... and for what?

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

For what it's worth, the squirrel might have had a lot of things besides rabies. He could have eaten something like you pointed out, or he could have had some other kind of infection. Rodents are fragile little things.

Had a sudden encounter with a squirrel that is not avoiding people or dogs and is having seizures, so I guess that's the rest of my plans for the night.

(Possibilities:

Ate a chemical

FUCKING RABIES)

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

The good news is that rabies is a VERY fragile virus. It doesn't live long outside of the body, once the proteins in the saliva break down it pretty much dies. if you're really worried, bleach and alcohol kill it very well. Your odds of being infected through casually touching droplets on the ground an animal was on hours ago are VERY low. As in, "unluckiest person on earth" low.

Had a sudden encounter with a squirrel that is not avoiding people or dogs and is having seizures, so I guess that's the rest of my plans for the night.

(Possibilities:

Ate a chemical

FUCKING RABIES)

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

If you got bit or aren't sure if you did, ask your local hospital or health department for Post-exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) for rabies immediately. There is no "maybe I was overreacting" or anything else. Get the treatment immediately.

If you know for sure you weren't bitten and didn't come in contact with any bodily fluids, you're probably okay, but ask a doctor to be sure and follow their advice no matter what.

Had a sudden encounter with a squirrel that is not avoiding people or dogs and is having seizures, so I guess that's the rest of my plans for the night.

(Possibilities:

Ate a chemical

FUCKING RABIES)

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

A woman named Caroline was diagnosed with glioblastoma, the most aggressive of all brain cancers. Average survival after diagnosis is one year.

She was pregnant at the time of diagnosis. Pregnancy is contraindicated with the chemotherapy and radiation regimens she needed.

Florida denied her her abortion, using the reasoning that as she was terminally ill, an abortion wouldn't save her life, only prolong it. She was forced to travel out of state to get her abortion.

This is why "life of the mother" exceptions don't work. To anti-choicers, there is no condition deadly enough to actually qualify for one. They exist as a fig leaf to hide the reality of their views.

The actual science, though, is clear. Abortion is healthcare. It is not 'murder' and restrictions on it only lead to the procedure being attempted in unsafe conditions. Bans cause OBGYNs to leave the state in droves, and cause maternal mortality rates to rise drastically.

An "abortion ban with exceptions for the life of the mother" is functionally a total ban and will get pregnant people killed.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

So you’re saying medicine is not political?

Anything can be politicized, but that doesn't make the thing inherently political. It just means politicians are using it as fodder for culture war nonsense.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Whoever sent me an ask, Tumblr ate it- try again.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Young people can have back pain. Young people can have joint pain. Young people can require a cane to get around. Young people can have memory problems. Young people can get migraines. Young people can lose their eyesight. Young people can lose their hearing. Young people can lose their teeth and require dentures. Young people can have neurological disorders. Young people can go through menopause. Young people can have heart attacks. Young people can have strokes. Young people can go through all kinds of things you think only happens to older people and they don’t deserve to be invalidated or bullied just because you have never heard of it.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

reminder that adhd medication isn't a luxury or preference, but a lifesaving medication. a 10 year long study in the usa showed that, when properly medicated, the rate of car crashes people with adhd get into goes down significantly--men's rate drops by 38%, and women's by 42%. the med shortage, denial of meds by doctors, rising prices, and the "war on drugs" has killed--with such a car dependent society, not driving frequently isn't an option, which means we need better healthcare and need it now.

https://shorturl.at/8VD8B

edit because i forgot to explain: short link is to an article by the washington post, it should be free to read

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Source

CDC Wastewater Viral Activity Monitoring

BreatheTeq

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

CDC voice: "what do you expect us to do, recommend that children be kept home when they have communicable disease? If we do that, parents will stay home from work too, and then they're not generating capital for the ruling class!"

CDC voice: "I know I said we'd do something about covid if it got very high again, but we have real tough jobs to do, like removing the recommendations that children with head lice or watery diarrhea be sent home to prevent further spread of their illness."

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

the "new normal" couldve been respirators & rapid tests & hepa filters & universal basic income & accessibility & caring about other people.........

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

This is a periodic PSA (geared towards those living in the United States, as I'm not sure of the protocol for hospitals in other countries: please jump in if it's the same in your area!):

If you are showing signs of an overdose, allergic reaction, or other emergency relating to recreational drug use, it is okay to call an ambulance/go to the hospital. The police can't arrest you unless you have drugs or paraphernalia on your person. Your doctors and nurses won't turn you in, either, because they want people to come in when they are sick, and they know that this will guarantee no one reaches out in emergency. In fact, some states even have relatively new laws that explicitly prohibit hospitals from reporting these patients, just as an added safety measure.

If you took drugs recently, and you have a surgical procedure (including dental ones), you need to tell your care team. They won't report you, but they need to know, because the medications they use can kill you. It may be embarrassing to speak up, but it isn't worth your life.

Many cities have free Narcan in community buildings, and some colleges, fire stations, and etc have free trainings. Some bundle these in with first aid and CPR classes. Go if you can- it could save your life or someone else's.

If you think you are experiencing an emergency, don't let your drug use stop you from seeking help. You deserve to have your life saved, too. I won't lie and say every single doctor is perfect on this, because doctors are human beings, but your chances of one fucking you over and trying to get the police involved are low enough that I'd take that gamble over a potential overdose or allergic reaction any day.

It will be scary- and if you need to call a friend to help you through and advocate for you, that is totally okay. Whatever it takes to get you in those doors. Just don't take the risk. If something is wrong, you need to be seen, even if- maybe especially if- you've been using.

[ask-an-epidemiologist]

Why "COVID anxiety" is not an actual disorder

In psychiatric terms, a phobia is considered as such if, and only if, it is unreasonable. So, an average person experiencing panic attacks at the sight of bees would be considered to have a phobia, because they are more afraid than the risk bees present to them.

However, a person with a fatal allergy to bee stings would not be considered apiphobic. This is because, with the risk of death bees present to them, having panic attacks is considered a rational reaction.

I'm sure you can already understand my point.

COVID not only can kill you (particularly if you're medically vulnerable), but it can cause severe disability. Even ignoring that people who have had COVID in the last three weeks are 81 times likelier to die of cardiac events than uninfected people, survivors of COVID are also 40% likelier to develop neurological sequelae. Rates of POTS or other dysautonomias (dysfunctions of the autonomous nervous system, which can be anywhere from "uncomfortable" to "rendering a patient bedridden") are through the roof, and neurologists are finding huge increases in the under-45 demographic of their dementia patients- a demographic that was previously extremely rare.

If someone wears protective eyewear while welding because they don't want to be blinded by an arc flash, we consider that a normal and reasonable precaution. So why are people who mask being labeled as "anxious about COVID" considering that this virus will very likely disable them if not kill them outright?

"COVID anxiety" is a rational behavior, not a medical diagnosis- so why are we treating it as one? Simple: it's another politicization of medicine. Just as "hysteria" was used to silence women, and lobotomization was used to subjugate inconvenient people (especially of rival political affiliations), "COVID anxiety" is being used to silence those who refuse to cooperate with the false narrative that COVID is over and/or no big deal. The very sight of a mask is a stark reminder to medical officials and laymen alike that they should be doing something they aren't. It's why some doctors aren't even "letting" chemo patients, one of the most severely immunocompromised demographics, do this. Because even though they are carefully avoiding a lot more illnesses than COVID, the sight of the mask still makes the doctor think of the COVID precautions they are ignoring first and foremost.

That is to say, "COVID anxiety" is a punitive diagnosis made by doctors when they are angry at the discomfort they feel when their patients remind them of their utter inadequacy, and they created this solely to stigmatize and demean patients to ensure they wouldn't subvert the expected power dynamic again.

Zero competent medical professionals actually use this terminology for their patients, and if yours uses it for you, run, don't walk, to a new clinic. Helping you is a secondary goal at best for your doctor.