W.H.O. says asypmtomatic spread is "very rare"
“Experts” and doctors should have never been making policy decisions in the first place. And most of the doctors arguing for a strict lockdown were not and are not practicing physicians, they are stat-jockeys.
Covid-19 was and is a gigantic political weapon. It was, and is, a notable public health concern, but it became something else entirely particularly in the United States. It became a tool of revolution, used as an instrument for change. Whether a person thinks the proposed change is good or bad colors that person’s understanding of the threat posed.
I agree with your sentiment on here IjohnB, but not all your points.
I am a scientist/stat jockey. Many stat jockies recognized that this virus is ultimately an acceptable risk to the non-obese working population.
The disconnect is that a lockdown was ever going to be effective in the long run in saving lives. Stat jokeys saying a lot of people will die were accurate! (Although inflated by the beauracratic statatisticians shackled by liability).
What people miss is there were two options. Open up and people die or half ass close down and, in my opinion, just as many people die but our economy goes to shit.
Two shitty options but i choose the one where we stay open.
The famous book, "How to Lie With Statistics" apparently was written with you as exhibit A.
Your claim "Although inflated by..." immediately shows you as one who loves to lie with statistics.
Two other things that people miss are:
1. There is at least one, if not more other options. Instead of half assed close down, more targeted closedowns. Focusing broadly on things that can be done with less economic impact (e.g. if your work is amenable to being dine from home, do it), minimize air travel etc. and then more restrictive policies only where the medical system is likely to be overwhelmed. This would require robust testing and monitoring.
2. There would be a significant economic impact with or without shutdowns. Refrigerator trucks full of dead bodies is not good for consumer confidence.
World about to ignore the science on this shit and go full Ron Swanson...and we will probably end up like him at his Dr visit where he is in fine health and just has to eat a banana once in a while
I posted the same thing from the NIH weeks ago. Nobody wanted to hear about it.
Yea and my aunt is my uncle
COVID was soooo April.
This WHO announcement is far far from definitive. Until solid evidence in the form of scientifically-gathered medical research is made public, proceed with caution.
I'm staying on "Team Sopwith" until proven otherwise.
I mean the WHO might want to be more cautious about their statements. They still haven't taken the "L" and admitted that masks help reduce transmission. Also, there's lot of documented events where like NBA players getting it from playing one another or, or entire cycle class was infected, or a massive outbreak from an Italian soccer game, or even entire homeless shelter getting it where almost everyone was asymptomatic that don't really make sense unless it was being spread by people who weren't sick.
We also have to keep in mind there's a difference between those who were asymptomatic and those who were PRE-symptomatic which is entirely different.
As opposed to being spread by people who are sick?
I haven't read too deeply into the super-carrier studies but everyone that I read about (all four) the person knew they were sick but unaware that they had CV-19.
Sorry, this just doesn't track. If it were easily spread by asymptomatic people, there would have been many, many, many more cases like you're describing.
And the fact that "almost everyone was asymptomatic" at a homeless shelter doesn't mean that they were the ones who were spreading it.
So those “conspiracy theorists” were right all along
remember this when climate change becomes the flavor of the month again
We won't hear about climate change until the literal extinction of black people at the hands of racist white cops fizzles out.
sorry, climate change is going to the back of the line. we have these little beauties to worry about now...
Poor murder hornets. I think the current crisis has some legs so they're going to have to wait for their day in the sun.
Little beauties?
...and here I was thinking the murder hornets were "Big Uglies"...
Just send in the praying mantis...
saw those, but i'm guessing there are magnitudes more murder hornets than mantises.
Just stop man. This is ridiculous.
Can you help me understand at which point you believe that the science behind climate change is a conspiracy?
1 Do you doubt that greenhouse gases play a key role in regulating our climate and that without them the world would be much colder? - because that science goes back to at least the 1850s. - https://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/02/the-woman-who-identified-the-greenhouse-effect-years-before-tyndall/
2. Do you doubt that concentrations of CO2 are rising? - because that science goes back to at least the late 1950s. - https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
3. Do you doubt that temperatures are rising? https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
4. Do you believe all of that but doubt that the rising temperatures and rising CO2 levels are linked? ‘
“Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions. The evidence on the impacts of climate change is also clear and growing. The atmosphere and the Earth’s oceans are warming, the magnitude and frequency of certain extreme events are increasing, and sea level is rising along our coasts.
The National Academies are focused on further understanding climate change and how to limit its magnitude and adapt to its impacts, including on health. We also recognize the need to more clearly communicate what we know. To that end, in 2018, the National Academies launched an initiative to make it easier for decision makers and the public to use our extensive body of work to inform their decisions. In addition, we will be expanding our Based on Science communications effort to include clear, concise, and evidence-based answers to frequently asked questions about climate change.
A solid foundation of scientific evidence on climate change exists. It should be recognized, built upon, and most importantly, acted upon for the benefit of society.” https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2019/06/national-academies-presidents-affirm-the-scientific-evidence-of-climate-change
5. Or do you believe all of that and just disagree that rising temperatures are something to worry about despite organizations like the US military saying “the Department of Defense is precariously underprepared for the national security implications of climate change-induced global security challenges” https://climateandsecurity.org/2019/11/01/update-chronology-of-u-s-military-statements-and-actions-on-climate-change-and-security-jan-2017-november-2019/
I have a hard time believing anything the W.H.O. says after they put out so much misinformation in the beginning. Most of it from China.
Other research about super spreaders also tends to back this up.
On another Covid Topic why is the CDC guidance so shitty and why do schools then treat this guidance as gospel. As an example, the CDC’s document on reopening schools says the following, “CDC offers the following considerations for ways in which schools can help protect students, teachers, administrators, and staff and slow the spread of COVID-19.” So, it’s not even guidance, it’s just some shit to think about?
Later they state that, “Space seating/desks at least 6 feet apart when feasible”. Well since there are essentially no schools in the country with enough room to space kids 6 feet, and still have all kids attend schools, its not feasible. So why even say it?
The schools look at the list of things to think about and decide its gospel. As a result, they are putting together plans to have school for two days a week and essentially abandon providing our kids the education they deserve. Here is an article where the head of the School Superintendents Association says without additional funds they can’t meet the CDC recommendations and many schools may just need to go back to distance learning.
Are the CDC and other public health professionals ever going to figure out that recommendations, guidance, shit to think about, that is not feasible to implement is worthless?
If we asked these people to offer recommendations on how Michigan can win a national championship they would probably come back with guidelines on use of cyborg players.
Because nobody knows for sure. C-19 in the summer != C-19 in the fall/winter possibly. We just don’t know till It happens.
There is no crisis so grim that it can't be exploited by a politician. The superintendent just saw a way to squeeze more tax dollars for his district.
In the absence of public health guidance, people will just make up their own. It may be more or less accurate.
Please be true. I’m not sure what to believe.
This twitter thread gives more context.
https://twitter.com/jeremyfaust/status/1270106164827574272?s=20
"The correct conclusion is NOT that the WHO has evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not commonly spread asymptomatically. That’s possibly rather wrong. The correct interpretation is more likely that CONTACT TRACING is woefully inadequate at finding asymptomatic spread. That’s different!"
"So the correct statement is: “We are finding that contact tracing is inadequate to the task at hand. It is important for tracking symptomatic disease. But testing asymptomatic high risk workers is the only way to try to detect that subset which we can’t otherwise detect.”
Not sure how he's coming to that conclusion as it addresses that in the article.
"We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing,” she said. “They’re following asymptomatic cases. They’re following contacts. And they’re not finding secondary transmission onward. It’s very rare.”
Here's another informative thread, this one from Andy Slavitt @ASlavitt
I'm pretty certain he's got enough expertise in the field to be listened to.
https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1270135499659923458?s=09
10. There are definitely going to be characteristics of people more infectious & more succeptable. When we learn them definitively it will be of real value. We’re not there yet. 11. At that point we will look back & blame scientists for not knowing everything from the start.
Lol he is certainly right about that.
All I have to say to the WHO is: we won't get fooled again!
The W.H.O. (chuckle). They change direction as the President tweets.
Duffman says a lot of things.
Just wait till the Yellowstone Supervolcano erupts later this year, we won’t even care about covid then
So much for the PAC-12, not that they're on anyone's radar anymore, football OR basketball.
Depending on how significant the Yellowstone eruption, we could expect 6 inches of ash in Chicago so it could be a bad year for Big 10 activity also. They seem to occur about every 700,000 years plus or minus 50,000 years (ballpark) and the last big one was about 700,00 years ago so we may due given some very rough numbers.
I would have upvoted you if not for the square referring to Betty White.
Pretty much everything the "scientists" who must be believed has turned out to be inaccurate or a downright lie. We ruined our economy for these fucks and their allies in the media. Never forget.
Guess what, not all of our economic woes were due to the shutdowns. Some were actually due to the virus itself.
“In the weeks before states around the country issued lockdown orders this spring, Americans were already hunkering down. They were spending less, traveling less, dining out less. Small businesses were already cutting employment. Some were even closing shop.
People were behaving this way — effectively winding down the economy — before the government told them to.”
So ... TX reopened early .... and what happened? They hit a record today for hospitalization (1935 patients). It can’t all be spreading just from symptomatic people. C-19 positive cases went from 4.27% at end of May to 7.55% now.
W.H.O. wants their funding back from Trump. Makes me suspicious of any thing they say (not that I wasn’t before).
Texas daily deaths have climbed from a low of 22 to 24 deaths per day which is still down from a high of 32.
Texas ended their stay at home order. Businesses, schools and large gatherings are still restricted. They never closed their day care operations.
California still has a stay at home order and their cases are rising also. Florida cases are in low neutral and Georgia cases are going down. Sweden is going the wrong way from a recent low but how would that be due to opening too early when they never closed?
I can't conclude anything about asymptomatic transmissions from the above but the time period between contracting the virus and showing symptons is something like 1-3 days which is not a long period to be contagious and not know it compared to coughing for 3-6 weeks.
Since most victims are not supercarriers it might work out that most people are not asymptomatic transmitters or just don't come in contact with many people.
thinking of opening up a clinic to help those addicted to fear porn. i think its a big need in today's society, just need to get the insurance providers to get me approval.
Are you sure all your data is correct?
This https://www.covidexitstrategy.org/suggests that both cases and test positivity is going up in FL, and that Georgia cases are more flat than going down while test positivity is going up.
1. TX has seen day over day rises in hospitalizations since lifting restrictions. AND - for the last 2 days have set records for hospitalizations. State has gone from 1935 to 2056 day over day, which is a 6% increase day over day.
2. Florida’s has seen a 46% in cases over the last week. Florida’s saw a 3% increase in deaths over the last week.
3. U.K., Italy, and Germany all saw cases/deaths spike since easing restrictions.
Ahh is this why the governor said fuck it to her months of social distancing rants to join the protests this weekend.
Um, NSFMF...
"In a study published June 3 in the Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers at the Scripps Research Translational Institute reviewed data from 16 different groups of COVID-19 patients from around the world to get a better idea of how many cases of coronavirus can likely be traced to people who spread the virus without ever knowing they were infected.
Their conclusion: at minimum, 30%, and more likely 40% to 45%."
https://time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread/?amp=true&__twitter_impression=true
So much for following the science when experts flip flop on it. Im watching the CDC numbers every day. The next week of covid testing should shed more light on asymptomatic spread given the high number of protestors in the streets and the lag time of testing. Hopefully there isn't a significant increase and it paves the way to open stadiums.
Here’s what scientist I know have said and something I saw in reading it. The article doesn’t cite a peer reviewed study. The spokesperson loosely mentioned “we have done tracing” and found...which is anecdotal. She then walked-back her own claims on Twitter that their own news report conflated what she actually meant.
I was really excited about the title, but nothing in the article is inspiring. Just more misinformation from WHO, jumping the gun on findings that are contradicted by real peer-reviewed, replicable studies.