I think the cases go into a spreadsheet grouped by age range.
In theory it looks something like this (not accurate):
“<5:
5-10:
11-20:
21-40:
41-60:
61-90:
90+:”
Back when it was just one or two cases it was easy to say “one female aged 41-60” or “one male over 90” or something, but now that it’s many cases per day they just use the labels as a range.
…really? That’s pretty easy to fix… I wouldn’t have thought of that as being acceptable/allowable reporting. It was really messing with my OCD - thanks!
“We find that most environments and contacts are under conditions of low virus abundance (virus-limited) where surgical masks are effective at preventing virus spread. More advanced masks and other protective equipment are required in potentially virus-rich indoor environments including medical centers and hospitals.”
vs.
“Compared to N95/FFP2 respirators which have very low particle penetration rates (around ~5%), surgical and similar masks exhibit higher and more variable penetration rates (around ~30-70%)”
By the way, a couple of positive cases have been declared to be false positives. Got people I know who thought they might have been at the same store with a confirmed case find out that after 3 tests that person is now confirmed to be a false positive, so they can go back to work.
Imagine if a batch of tests turned out to be defective and it turns out that Taiwan actually has zero cases and this was all for nothing. Obviously impossible now they have done DNA tests on the strains but an interesting thought nonetheless.
You do understand that women take at least 2 hours at the beauty parlor. Washing, conditioning, drying and brushing. Heck, it takes a lot of effort to look good!