W.H.O. says asypmtomatic spread is "very rare"
Did information change before or after they let China dictate their external messaging? The WHO has royally fucked this up and their credibility is shit - there's no reason to explain it beyond that.
Based on a huge spike in internet searches in Wuhan for the word, “diarrhea,” the virus is at least 8 months old. This story would be both fascinating and hilarious if it wasn’t associated with a global pandemic:
to quote thoreau, 'some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in your milk'.
Interestingly, CDC still doesn’t think it arrived in the US until January.
Four separate lines of evidence (syndromic surveillance, virus surveillance, phylogenetic analysis, and retrospectively identified cases) suggest that limited U.S. community transmission likely began in late January or early February 2020, after a single importation from China, followed by multiple importations from Europe. Until late February, COVID-19 incidence was too low to be detected by emergency department syndromic surveillance for COVID-19–like illness.
And when did diarrhea get added to the list of symptoms for Covid-19?
Well since 1/3 of the deaths or 35,000 people died in nursing homes, how about we start by protecting them.
1.2 million US have died since 2020 began. Why is this number not ever quoted? (because they die of Non-scary things like flu? heart disease? cancer? )
Is this an increase or decrease from 2019?
At this exact moment, an increase. What it will be at years end, that will tell the tale.
Because in less than three months, enough people have been killed by Covid that it will likely be at a minimum the 7th leading cause of death in the US this year and it doesn’t seem a big stretch to imagine it ending up as high as 3rd.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282929#alzheimers-disease
Right now it is between diabetes (85,000 deaths in 2018) and Alzheimers (122,000). cerbrovascular (148,000), chronic lower respiratory disease (160,000) and accidental injuries (167,000) are 3,4 and 5.
Seems quite unlikely to pass cancer at 600,000 or heart disease at 655,000.
"It's not that old information was necessarily wrong..."
false. they interpreted data, especially early on, incorrectly. the WHO was, in fact, WRONG. a lot.
Wrong AND definitive in their statements. I'm not sure why anyone is sticking up for them... besides someone they don't like said something nasty about the WHO.
Based on hundreds of thousands in every major city standing shoulder to shoulder for over a week...either everyone is going to die in 7 days or there isn't as much to worry about thanks to #socialdistancing #wearamask #foryounotme...there's no undoing the last week of Covid fucking what?!!!
Or something in between negative infinity and positive infinity...
Sounds like the epidemic modeling formula Fauci used.
From Sopwith's Neck Sharpies III: Asymptomatic carriers have the comparable viral loads to symptomatic patients, and are probably more infectious, not less.
Remain doubtful, staysafe.
Yeah, just based on what W.H.O. is citing, it's going to be a lot of tension between the clinical data and the contact tracer data. The clinical data seems pretty definitive: asymptomatic people have viral loads at least as high and often higher than symptomatic people, and shedding of that virus peaks just before or coincident with symptom onset.
That's all quantitative data, which leaves open the possibility that there's something qualitative about the viral particles that are shed later on in the infection that makes them more likely to actually make people sick than the ones at the beginning. But that's guesswork at this point.
If contact tracers aren't seeing the asymptomatic spread in the field at the rates you would expect, that's a good thing, but something's up. I suspect some of this has to do with indoor vs. outdoor transmission being very different things. But could also be that the virus that "survives and advances" all the immune challenges later in infection is just nastier by the time it jumps hosts.
All I can say is stay tuned.
But social distancing rah rah...but masks rah rah. But screaming idiots super spreaders. It's time they just double down, admit a shit ton of people have been Ill, many have died due to highly contagious risks, and for now we really have little fucking clue what's next because a good amount of what we told everyone earlier is not 100% accurate. Follow simple viral preventative measures, more so if you are elderly or often care for the elderly...until further notice. Because it's been a long damn time since HIV AIDS and we don't seem to have that under wraps...
Comparing HIV (a lentivirus) to SARS-cov-2 (a coronavirus) is not useful. They have wildly different routes of infection and replication. A big reason it's hard to corral HIV is bc without constant testing by literally everyone, it's hard to know who has it because it can lie dormant for YEARS. Roughly 40% of our genome is leftovers from ancient lentiviruses that never reached their replication phase. You have a somewhat decent point, but those two are absolutely not comparable
These posts (Sopwith, Blue_by_U) make an interesting pair.
One is emotional and simple. One is measured and thoughtful. Pity there aren't more of the latter in these threads.
humility is a virtue
Point taken. :)
Is there a distinction drawn between “pre-symptomatic” and asymptomatic? Could that explain the difference?
Pre-symptomatic are people who go on to become symptomatic but weren't at the time of the contact trace or lab test, so at that time they're considered "asymptomatic" until symptoms show up. If you dig into the W.H.O. statement today, they think a lot of people whose symptoms are so mild that they were classified as "asymptomatic" really should have been considered "mildly symptomatic." From the W.H.O. team lead that gave the presser today:
[I]f you actually go back and say how many of them are truly asymptomatic, we find out that many have really mild disease, very mild disease, they’re not quote unquote COVID symptoms, meaning they may not have developed fever yet.
The average American cannot follow the arrows on the ground telling them which way to walk up and down aisles.
Do you think people forming an opinion on this are going to be able to distinguish between "pre-symptomatic" and "asymptomatic"?
Throw in data from sources which is over or under-reported (based upon narrative) and contradictory guidance, and I think it's fair to say the shit show we see in this forums shouldn't be unexpected.
So, in an effort not to be a hypocrite, I will say that I hope that these WHO data are correct, although I don't really trust them any more than I did before, and I'm going to refrain from calling for relaxation of social distancing rules based solely on this data. (I think we should relax the rules because they're pointless and very clearly aren't being observed by large numbers of people -- and having a rule that isn't followed is a really bad idea).
That said, the idea of easy, aerosolized spreading by asymptomatic individuals never made sense. The R0 being observed was way too low: it should have been at least 10, if not more. I mean, think about it -- we didn't really start taking any precautions until the virus had been on our shores for at least 6 weeks. If this spread easily in aerosol form, from merely talking (or even singing), with a population with no native immunity... how many people did you talk to on an average pre-COVID day? We had all of these crowds at sporting events -- now considered way too dangerous -- for several weeks of community transmission. The spread would have been astronomical.
I mean, if the virus can be transmitted easily via aerosols, why didn't most of Rudy Gobert's teammates or opponents get it? The referees, front office members? Media?
The simple fact of the matter is that the far more plausible scenario is the same one that both the WHO and CDC came up with originally, back before the messaging got politicized (by all sides): most (not all) infections likely come from direct contact with a symptomatic individual.
So the suggestion here is to be suspicious of the World Health Organization - the primary, you know, health organization in the world, or at least it pretends to be, with an army of world-leading scientists at the top of their fields of study - because a guy wrote a blog entry on the college sports site you follow?
I mean I think it's clear that the WHO subordinated their health message to a political one some time ago, which has to be one of the worst breaches of trust a medical organization can make. So they're to blame for the diminished power of their message.
But have to tip your cap to 2020 when glass towers full of PHDs and publications vs. Guy with a Snoopy Avatar results in a win for the underdog (pun intended).
Now this is just amusing. You're essentially claiming an anonymous college football blog commenter is more credible than the WHO.
Now this is just amusing. You're essentially claiming an anonymous college football blog commenter is more credible than the WHO.
Oh WHO, you are just adorable. Now, go sit down over there and "shhhh" because adults are talking.
P.S. I am VERY MAD at you for making Trump right about something, even if just in a "stopped watch is right twice a day" way. VERY MAD...
You would be surprised how many positive things have happened and how many negative things never did.
Power of American is diversity of opinions and inputs so you can make a balanced, factual decision.
Translation: WHO says 'ARE YOU READY FOR SOME FOOTBALLLL?'
can i get some baseball first?
I really dont think theyre playing. Not enough tendies $$$
i think if the players and owners budge to 85-90 cents on the dollar for the pro rata salaries, it could get done. the latest rejected proposal was 75 cents on the dollar.
I thought asymptomatic people were the most contagious...
ya, i think this was disproven a few weeks ago when they said that if it were true, kids would have been spreading it like wildfire to other kids in school, parents and siblings. and that does not appear to be the case.
Thanks
Is anyone keeping track of this shit? If so, can you please update the tracker to include this latest news. Thanks
Fuck em all. I'm sick of the weekly change to how covid spreads
No masks, only sick people wear masks, masks for everyone, now face shields, it spreads by touching surfaces now it doesn't spread much by touching surfaces, asymptomatic people spread it the most now they dont
The experts have no clue what's going on
But hey...you've been in isolation for three months. That has to count for something
You dont understand, Blue. Youre arguing with people who have claimed the moral high ground. Theyre good. Youre bad.
You cant say things like 'Arent the CDC and WHO much more bureaucracy driven than by science?' You can't argue the logic of trying to implement a policy that will never ever fucking work in America.
It's good person vs bad person. And you are the bad person, my man.
I just practiced basic common sense and hygiene like always.
Never usually get sick, dont take a flu shot.
Problem is now we have people scarred for life. And the political bandwagon made it worse
It's no ones fault in the US. Well, there have been some really poor decisions made with our treasured elders and people with underlying conditions.
It's a virus that should have been honestly communicated to be transmitted person to person by China.
Lets look at a few quotes from the President of the United States - there may have been another challenge with honest communication that you are missing.
Jan 24
President Trump issues his first tweet on coronavirus. "China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!"
February 7
"Just had a long and very good conversation by phone with President Xi of China. He is strong, sharp and powerfully focused on leading the counterattack on the Coronavirus. He feels they are doing very well, even building hospitals in a matter of only days. Nothing is easy, but......he will be successful, especially as the weather starts to warm & the virus hopefully becomes weaker, and then gone. Great discipline is taking place in China, as President Xi strongly leads what will be a very successful operation. We are working closely with China to help!" the president tweeted.
February 27
"I want you to understand something that shocked me when I saw it that — and I spoke with Dr. Fauci on this, and I was really amazed, and I think most people are amazed to hear it: The flu, in our country, kills from 25,000 people to 69,000 people a year. That was shocking to me. And, so far, if you look at what we have with the 15 people and their recovery, one is — one is pretty sick but hopefully will recover, but the others are in great shape. But think of that: 25,000 to 69,000. ... "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done," the president said during a Coronavirus Task Force Press briefingat the White House.
March 4
Yeah, I think where these people are flying, it's safe to fly. And large portions of the world are very safe to fly. So we don't want to say anything other than that. And we have closed down certain sections of the world, frankly, and they've sort of automatically closed them also. They'll understand that and they understand it better, perhaps, than anybody. Yes, it's safe." — White House meeting with airline executives.
March 6
Anybody that wants a test can get a test. ... The tests are all perfect, like the letter was perfect, the transcription was perfect, right?" — CDC headquarters in Atlanta.
March 13
We have 40 people right now. Forty. Compare that with other countries that have many, many times that amount. And one of the reasons we have 40 and others have — and, again, that number is going up, just so you understand. And a number of cases, which are very small, relatively speaking — it's going up. But we've done a great job because we acted quickly. We acted early. And there's nothing we could have done that was better than closing our borders to highly infected areas." — Rose Garden press conference.
March 24
There is tremendous hope as we look forward and we begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel." — White House Coronavirus Task Force Press briefing.
Kinda obsessive having those quotes on hand, but you do you.
You think Biden, or Hillary or whoever the fuck would have had us shutdown before Europe? I just hit the gym. Casinos are opening up. Restaurants were full yesterday.
Stop pretending that America was ever going to shut down like some small, isolated island country.
Not sure what you are responding to, but nowhere in my post did I say that Hilary or Biden would have shutdown earlier. I do think there is a good chance that, they:
1. Wouldn’t have praised China so much for their”transparency” and then turn around and blame WHO for the same thing
2. Wouldn’t have suggested in late February that our cases were going down to zero soon
3. Would have been more on top of getting good testing in place (and at a bare minimum would not be so clueless as to suggest that everyone who wanted a test could get one.
When you put someone in charge of government who doesn’t believe government works, you shouldn’t be surprised that he appoints a bunch of people that don’t believe government works, that when you need it to, government doesn’t work.
As for being obsessed, I’m not sure you are familiar with this thing called google, but it only takes about 30 seconds to find a long list of stupid things/lies our esteemed president has tweeted or said on just about any topic out there.
Okay. Policies would have been the same but press conference quality greatly improved. Keep fighting the good fight.
Earlier better testing, working more proactively with states, communicating more honesty, accurately and consistently - you can call that just about press conferences, but a well run government response with better information collection and sharing could have made a big difference.
compare how quickly the Obama administration managed to ramp up testing for swine flu as compared to how quickly the Trump administration did.
https://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/cdcresponse.htm
This was after only 3 months in office in contrast to Trump being in office for about 3 years.
I see only empty nitpicking of rhetoric in your long winded posts. Protect the elderly/at risk is the policy the data pointed to three months ago, and it's what it says now.
If you say it's okay to open up now, then youre saying it was okay to open up then. Bringing up February Trump speak is meaningless.
I see only putting words in my mouth. I haven’t said anything in either of my posts about whether we should have shutdown in March or when we should have opened up. What I did say is that better testing would have provided better data and that it is pretty hard to imagine another president doing worse than Trump in that regard and it is quite easy to imagine another president doing better.
I’ll tell you what my opinion on shutting down was in March and what it is now so that you can stop asserting what you think I believe:
In major cities like NYC, Chicago and Washington DC - the federal government should have been a leader in telecommuting mandating it for federal agencies and encouraging private companies to do it at least as early as mid March when San Fransisco did. I still think it was right for any number of urban areas like NYC, Washington etc to shutdown because of the very real threat to their health infrastructures. I wish we’d had wider spread testing so that we would have had good data to better target shutdowns. But areas like Hancock, Georgia clearly show that there were other areas of the country where a shutdown was appropriate to avoid overwhelming hospitals. At the same time, it seems pretty clear that I full fledged shutdown orders were not needed everywhere. I also believe that the data clearly shows that there were areas like the DC metro area where hospitals were still quite crowded with Covid patients in late May, so I think people like Governor Hogan were right to allow more localized decision-making with regards to when to open up.
I think your argument about protecting the elderly and at risk is a bit oversimplistic and other than not sending patients back to nursing homes, would really like to know what you would have done. BTW - CDC guidance was entirely consistent with sending patients back to nursing homes:
”Patients Discharged to Long-term Care (LTC) or Assisted Living Facilities
The guidance addresses three patient scenarios for COVID-19 patients discharged to an LTC facility or an assisted living facility.
1. Transferred COVID-19 patients for whom TBPs are still required should go to a facility with adequate personal protective equipment and an ability to adhere to infection prevention and control recommendations for the care of COVID-19 patients. Preferably, the patient would be placed at a facility that has alreadyMeaningless r
cared for COVID-19 cases, in a specific unit designated to care for COVID-19
residents.
2. Transferred COVID-19 patients for whom TBPs have been discontinued, but
continue to have persistent symptoms of COVID-19 (e.g., a persistent cough)
should be placed in a single room and be restricted to their room.
3. Transferred COVID-19 patients for whom TBPs have been discontinued and the
symptoms have resolved do not require further restrictions.”
While there is not much that I’d compliment you on, I will say that at least you manage to compile your meaningless rhetoric and mischaracterization of others positions Into relatively short posts. Brevity on the other hand is clearly not my string suit.