The epidemiological target of lockdowns is to drive down the effective reproduction number (Rt) to less than 1. A key unknown is the duration that lockdowns need to be in place to achieve this and which lockdown measures are effective. Daily number of laboratory confirmed community coronavirus 2019 cases were extracted from regular reports from the Ministry of Health Singapore from 20 March 2020 to 4 May 2020. We generated daily Rt to estimate the time needed for these public health lockdown measures to control the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 as demonstrated by Rt < 1. It took about 14 days of nationwide lockdown for the Rt trend to change and start falling. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for time to Rt < 1 was day 15 of lockdown. We have shown that it is possible to start ‘bending the Rt curve’ about 2 weeks after implementation of specific lockdown measures with strict compliance.

At 25°C, synthetic schwertmannite, a common iron compound in acid mine drainage, completely converted in water to a sulphate-containing goethite within ~100 days. The rate of transformation doubled as the pH increased from 4.0 to 7.2. In deviation from its normal acicular habit, the goethite appeared as spherical aggregates.

Reaction time (RT) is often used in the assessment of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), presumably because it reflects either information processing speed or attentional capacity. To clarify this distinction, we examined behavioral RT and the within-subject variability of RT as they relate to electrophysiological measures of attention and information processing. These include the P300 latency, which reflects stimulus evaluation time, P300 amplitude, which reflects attentional allocation, and the preresponse component of the contingent negative variation (CNV), which reflects sustained attention. We found that the latency and variability in behavioral RT were not correlated with the latency or variability of the P300, suggesting that stimulus evaluation time is not a major contributor to RT and its variability in this paradigm. However, among normal controls, RT was related to P300 amplitude, and therefore to attentional allocation. For the TBI subjects, it was the variability, not the speed, of RT that was related to P300 amplitude and to the preresponse component of the CNV. These data suggest that, while in normal controls RT reflects attentional allocation, among TBI subjects it is the variability in RT that is sensitive to the ability to allocate and sustain attention. (JINS, 1997, 3, 95–107.)