That's fine, thanks for your kind response.
Your article summarized the findings and expanded the context which seems appropriate given that the information is already largely out there by now.
The original post was also made notable on /qr/ so it's as available as the sequel is.
If you write anything further on the topic, you might want to consider that even though hospitals are submitting directly to HHS, many states are still mixing confirmed and probable non-hospitalized cases together, so proper data analysis is still challenging, though improved.
A request for feedback and proper format on the op-ed was solicited and ignored.
A request for feedback on an earlier op-ed that happened to be written in the format that you prefer was also solicited and virtually ignored.
Given the lack of guidance and the earlier repeated encouragement on /qr/ for anons to "WRITE NOW, Right Now.”, your response reads like it came out of a corporate PR department (no offense).
At this juncture for anons not on the team, posting a citizens op-ed does not appear to be any different than posting on /qr/ where it can be taken and used by any media org to shape their own narrative as they please.
Which is fine if that's what you decide. The definition of community is rather broad as the IC has proven.