Asymptomatic spread of Covid very rare... per WHO

[jem]

Well I suspect there will be tremendous pressure on them.
They may fold.
They may retract.
They may be defunded.

They screwed up the Hydroxy stuff last week.

This really has been a major mess.



CDC also blew it.
This is why the exist and they screwed up the testing early on when it was important.

We have had suspciously very bad data from the get go.
Lots of terrible decisions have been made by "experts" ... not based on data.

Its seems to me that kind of unifrom incompetence among phds and scientists...
is hard to imagine.

The didn't follow their own guidelines and let their tests by corrupted by virus?
They said masks are useless then they made stuff up about masks.

Fauci never brought up clusters and superspreaders.
Then when nothing has changed he warns about economic devastation?

The media spout the narrative instead of asking questions.
The big tech companies suppress the speech of those questioning the "experts".


Then all of sudden riots are not shutdown for public safety concerns?
The experts are virtually silent.

We find out the infection fatality rate is not much different than the flu at about .3 per the CDC data.

Then the WHO admits the virus is rarely transmitted by those with no symptoms... which could be 35 to 50 percent of the cases... or more..
who really knows the data is so bad.

WHO has no credibility anymore since they first said human to human transmission is unlikely or rare...

They should be defunded and not the police haha

 

[piezoe]

Of course asymptomatic are not transmitters, what strange logic would suggest they should be? The number of a asymptomatic is incorrect in any case. These are people that tested positive by hugely unreliable finger prick serological tests. They showed positive for antibodies when in fact they were never infected in the first place. This explains the 80% asymptomatic reported from one cruise ship. The data is coming from unreliable finger prick serological testing which gives a very high number of false positives. There are reliable serological tests (ElISA) but the cheap "dip stick" test used on cruise ships and elsewhere have proved worthless. Unfortunately the CDC, under new Trump-appointed leadership, intermingled results from reverse transcriptase PCR, which tests for active viral infection, and highly unreliable finger prick serological tests, which are intended to test for the presence of antibodies. (There are reliable antibody tests available, but they are neither cheap nor quick.)

 

[El OchoCinco]

Of course asymptomatic are not transmitters, what strange logic would suggest they should be? The number of a asymptomatic is incorrect in any case. These are people that tested positive by hugely unreliable finger prick serological tests. They showed positive for antibodies when in fact they were never infected in the first place. This explains the 80% asymptomatic reported from one cruise ship. The data is coming from unreliable finger prick serological testing which gives a very high number of false positives. There are reliable serological tests (ElISA) but the cheap "dip stick" test used on cruise ships and elsewhere have proved worthless. Unfortunately the CDC, under new Trump-appointed leadership, intermingled results from reverse transcriptase PCR, which tests for active viral infection, and highly unreliable finger prick serological tests, which are intended to test for the presence of antibodies. (There are reliable antibody tests available, but they are neither cheap nor quick.)

If asymptomatic people don't transmit the virus then we should have just treated this like the flu and you stay home if not feeling well or showing symptoms At risk people in nursing homes and senior assisted facilities should have been on restrictive visitors and semi quarantined.

Then it was really like the flu with respect to how it spread.

If it was only spread by people with symptoms then we all went down the wrong road. We could have had a different plan all along.

 

[jem]

Don't you dare pull that shit now.
Your team told us this was so dangerous because asymptomatic people could spread the virus so we all had to be locked down, except for essential workers.


If you knew it was bullshit... you should have joined me and the others here calling it bullshit... instead of giving aid and comfort to the lockdown crazies.

Of course asymptomatic are not transmitters, what strange logic would suggest they should be? The number of a asymptomatic is incorrect in any case. These are people that tested positive by hugely unreliable finger prick serological tests. They showed positive for antibodies when in fact they were never infected in the first place. This explains the 80% asymptomatic reported from one cruise ship. The data is coming from unreliable finger prick serological testing which gives a very high number of false positives. There are reliable serological tests (ElISA) but the cheap "dip stick" test used on cruise ships and elsewhere have proved worthless. Unfortunately the CDC, under new Trump-appointed leadership, intermingled results from reverse transcriptase PCR, which tests for active viral infection, and highly unreliable finger prick serological tests, which are intended to test for the presence of antibodies. (There are reliable antibody tests available, but they are neither cheap nor quick.)

 

[Cuddles]

Of course asymptomatic are not transmitters, what strange logic would suggest they should be? The number of a asymptomatic is incorrect in any case. These are people that tested positive by hugely unreliable finger prick serological tests. They showed positive for antibodies when in fact they were never infected in the first place. This explains the 80% asymptomatic reported from one cruise ship. The data is coming from unreliable finger prick serological testing which gives a very high number of false positives. There are reliable serological tests (ElISA) but the cheap "dip stick" test used on cruise ships and elsewhere have proved worthless. Unfortunately the CDC, under new Trump-appointed leadership, intermingled results from reverse transcriptase PCR, which tests for active viral infection, and highly unreliable finger prick serological tests, which are intended to test for the presence of antibodies. (There are reliable antibody tests available, but they are neither cheap nor quick.)

If asymptomatic people don't transmit the virus then we should have just treated this like the flu and you stay home if not feeling well or showing symptoms At risk people in nursing homes and senior assisted facilities should have been on restrictive visitors and semi quarantined.

Then it was really like the flu with respect to how it spread.

If it was only spread by people with symptoms then we all went down the wrong road. We could have had a different plan all along.

Until this press release, the pre-eliminary studies & experts said asymptomatic carriers were contagious. It's the stickiness of dealing w/a novel virus, shit's subject to change. That's not to say the crazies didn't run with pseudo science & bunk sources saying similar things like Jem here.

May 28:
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/50-percent-of-people-with-covid19-not-aware-have-virus

 

[jem]

you are 100 percent troll douchebag... with that last sentence.

Until this press release, the pre-eliminary studies & experts said asymptomatic carriers were contagious. It's the stickiness of dealing w/a novel virus, shit's subject to change. That's not to say the crazies didn't run with pseudo science & bunk sources saying similar things like Jem here.

 

[Cuddles]

you are 100 percent troll douchebag... with that last sentence.

Yeah, but at least I'm not wrong

 

[Overnight]

Of course asymptomatic are not transmitters, what strange logic would suggest they should be?...

That statement is like a hindsight trade.

Dude, all we have heard is how virulent this COVID has been.

What strange logic would suggest that asymptomatic people could transmit a virus before symptoms show in the carrier? Ever heard of this little thing called HIV, which causes AIDS? It started back in the early 1980s.

Logically, it makes sense that if you have HERPES SIMPLEX I, but do not have a cold sore on your mouth, you can transmit that virus to someone else, even thought you do not have a cold sore on your mouth.

Logically.

 

[jem]

you have been wrong for months and you have been a douche about it.

Yeah, but at least I'm not wrong

 

[kingjelly]

It's a new virus, we didn't know shit about it and I am not sure we know much more today. It might wind up acting more like the flu than we think and fall will be a shit show, who knows. Maybe it will turn out to be way less harmful than we thought, but we had to assume the worst case scenario considering the number of lives at stake. Let's not forget a lot of people have died, what would the country do if there were over 30 9/11 scale attacks on our country.