Study: Infectivity of some asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers might be weak

[Economy 53,165]

Yeah not coughing and sneezing is probably one factor and the other factor is that their viral load is probably also lower making transmission less likely

 

However other findings have suggested asymptomatic can still transmit it (even if it might be far less likely) so I would still be wary of assuming someone that doesnt look sick can't get u infected (or u infect them)

 

That being said I did always wonder to what extent the media making it sound like asymptomatics are just going around infecting everyone they come in contact with could be the typical media sensasionalism

[HasBeyn 952]

hmmm interesting

[Chromatography 10,186]

n=1 of asymptomatic carriers showing this. keep in mind

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

This thread 

100k people dead this week. 

[Guest]

One case isn't all cases 

[FATCAT 60,984]

This one study is a single data point, doesn't really tell us much at all.

[RRR 3,996]

I don't care. I'm never leaving my house again. I am fine receiving stimulus checks. Where's my second one!?

[derpmonster 22,412]

53 minutes ago, Florin said:

There was doubt, but the media promoted things like: the virus can survive hours in the air, the droplets can travel x distance even when talking. 

It is really sad there was so little science behind all the political decisions taken these past 3 months. 

It's because we're learning about it as we go. It's new and we had to adjust as we researched. We had to act fast. 

[Maleficent 6]

22 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

This thread 

100k people dead this week. 

no one is negating that? or negating the deadliness of the virus when a person has symptoms 

[Adakam 2]

2 minutes ago, derpmonster said:

It's because we're learning about it as we go. It's new and we had to adjust as we researched. We had to act fast. 

This, science doesnt happen in an instant, WHO didnt even think human transmission was possible by mid January.

Anyway, studies like these are dangerous and helps people push their anti-lockdown agendas as it implies that asymptomatics are not dangerous at all. Are all asymptomatic people the same? Is their infection rate the same throughout the whole process? 

Theres still a LOT that we dont know about this thing. A week ago a famous-ish old singer in Mexico (known as "Yoshio"), died of the virus. Him and his family were isolating as much as they could for more than a month, only his wife would go out to get food with all the safety measures she could take, and guess what, only he got infected.... even when he started with symptoms in his home, noone else in his family got infected. 

We cant reduce the virus to "just people with symptoms are dangerous" when theres been a ton of cases that defy such a simple logic.

[Bt1 5,213]

8 hours ago, FATCAT said:

This one study is a single data point, doesn't really tell us much at all.

So what tell us more? The studies that dont exist that show the opposite?

It's time to stop with this non-sense. Until new data and better studies come around let's use the information we have and not minimize it. 

[Bt1 5,213]

8 hours ago, derpmonster said:

It's because we're learning about it as we go. It's new and we had to adjust as we researched. We had to act fast. 

We had to act fast and then we should have acted faster based on the new information we gained, not ignore it. 

[Bt1 5,213]

8 hours ago, Adakam said:

This, science doesnt happen in an instant, WHO didnt even think human transmission was possible by mid January.

Anyway, studies like these are dangerous and helps people push their anti-lockdown agendas as it implies that asymptomatics are not dangerous at all. Are all asymptomatic people the same? Is their infection rate the same throughout the whole process? 

Theres still a LOT that we dont know about this thing. A week ago a famous-ish old singer in Mexico (known as "Yoshio"), died of the virus. Him and his family were isolating as much as they could for more than a month, only his wife would go out to get food with all the safety measures she could take, and guess what, only he got infected.... even when he started with symptoms in his home, noone else in his family got infected. 

We cant reduce the virus to "just people with symptoms are dangerous" when theres been a ton of cases that defy such a simple logic.

So what are you tell us with this case? That the measures arent effective? Those people respected the rules.

Yoi ignore that at that point,  WHO simply shared the information it received from China. Nothing more. Based on similar information that came from China, the world got into lockdown, even if there was little to no data to show its effectiveness. 

[FATCAT 60,984]

1 hour ago, Florin said:

So what tell us more? The studies that dont exist that show the opposite?

It's time to stop with this non-sense. Until new data and better studies come around let's use the information we have and not minimize it. 

Risking the lives of millions by acting on a single study, instead of waiting on more verified information is the true non-sense. Think of what you're actually saying before you post.

[Bt1 5,213]

4 hours ago, FATCAT said:

Risking the lives of millions by acting on a single study, instead of waiting on more verified information is the true non-sense. Think of what you're actually saying before you post.

You should think again about what are you saying. I'm not gone ignore science just because politicians all over the world didnt bother to ask for studies in these 3 months.

U should be upset that there arent more studies and politicians can take extreme measures based on a possibility promoted by some "experts" that have been wrong so many times.