WHO: covid does not spread from asymptomatic carriers

[sd_shooter]

Truth comes out. Can we take off the masks now?

https://www.breitbart.com/health/2020/06/08/w-h-o-asymptomatic-coronavirus-spread-is-very-rare/

[Aeneas]

Truth comes out. Can we take off the masks now?

https://www.breitbart.com/health/202...-is-very-rare/

That may or may not be true, however I certainly don't trust the WHO. I saw this earlier, and my first thought was that they are trying to provide a rationale for the widespread support of the BLM "protesters."

[SW1917]

Truth comes out. Can we take off the masks now?

https://www.breitbart.com/health/202...-is-very-rare/

it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual

[stonefly-2]

You're so far gone now that you quote the WHO on health matters ?

Dude.....pull it together.

[SW1917]

4376663]You're so far gone now that you quote the WHO on health matters ?

Dude.....pull it together.[/QUOTE]

You do realize the quotes by me are from the WHO study the OP referenced - selective bias much

[PaperTarget]

Keep your masks on and, please, keep your shirts on.

So some genius figured out that a person without a cough doesn't transmit it as easily as someone with a cough. Good study, Doc.

So help me understand, what is "very rare". Can you compare it to the likelihood of a gun being pointed at you going off accidentally and if someone points a gun in your direction is it OK with you?

[PaperTarget]

PS. The title of this thread is misleading/wrong. It can happen. Just not as likely.

[CessnaDriver]

Well gaaaaaaaaaaaawdamn which is it?

Make up your minds! LOL

[CessnaDriver]

PS. The title of this thread is misleading/wrong. It can happen. Just not as likely.

Like as much as....

the flu!

Oh I went there.

[PaperTarget]

Like as much as....

the flu!

Oh I went there.

Hah!

[as_rocketman]

Truth comes out. Can we take off the masks now?

https://www.breitbart.com/health/202...-is-very-rare/

Breitbart citing the WHO. Strange times we live in, indeed.

You can take your mask off if you want. If anything, the events of the last couple of weeks expose the limits of blanket civil enforcement.

it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual

Right. So let's try to reconcile these two, seemingly contradictory opinions.

Reality is in the middle. Early on, we were told there was no such thing as asymptomatic spread (and it is a fine distinction, probably lost already in this discussion, between asymptomatic and presymptomatic status), but that was before the opening runaway infections. Now that things are calming down a bit we seem to be returning to this inference.

When we try to quantify transmissibility, we're going to have difficulties. We cannot set up a statistically significant number of test cells with human carriers, environmentally exposing them to uninfected people, and quantify the probability of transmission. There are large uncertainties. We can only try to estimate transmission by modeling population statistics, which themselves are not easy to sense.

However, those population statistics, for now, are doing pretty well -- in some cases unexpectedly well. LA, North Carolina, Utah, a few other places are seeing ominous growth, but other places such as Georgia remain pretty flat. This is despite an expectation for growth to ramp up again after their reopening. No, I'm not going to you all; if reopening was causing a new runaway pattern in Georgia, we'd have seen it by now.

So something else is also affecting transmission. This is not a surprise. We've been speculating about warmer weather, fewer people indoors, and the effectiveness of what mitigations remain (which are considerable). Those are working to some degree.

Those also will work differently on different people. Let's think about asymptomatic spreaders in particular. All else being equal, an asymptomatic spreader is likely to be less effective than a symptomatic victim coughing all over everyone. It's not going to be zero, but it'll be a lower rate. Same goes for children who, having younger and more active immune systems, also possibly more recent exposure to other coronaviruses than the average person, are better at controlling their viral load.

Your point, professor! I hear you say -- we're finally there. I suspect what we're seeing is that under current conditions, asymptomatic carriers are effectively unable to transmit the virus. The combination of their inherently lower virulence and environmental factors has knocked them down below a critical threshold.

So I think the WHO isn't entirely wrong. But I also think their outlook is too simplistic. Asymptomatic carriers do have the potential to start this all up again. We also can expect whatever in the environment that has slowed things down to reverse as soon as it disappears.

Make hay while the sun shines, and keep learning about the problem.

[seainc]

[SanDiego619]

LOL! What a bunch of BS!!!!!

First they screamed that we are killing old people if we don't wear masks because we might be SUPER SPREADERS

Now, it turned out, it was complete b.s. hey what a surprise!!

But keep wearing those masks, like good citizens. If it saves just ONE LIFE it is worth it. That is why you should also never drive a car, or step outside your home, EVER, because you might be saving a life if you stay home forever.

[Epaphroditus]

"From the data we have" is a total coput. Are they actually tracking viral positive asymptomatics to verify they infected anyone? Not likely.

[The Gleam]

Keep your masks on and, please, keep your shirts on.

But I have visible abs.