Study of 10 Mil finds no asymptomatic spread
Printed From: Avian Flu Talk
Category: Main Forums
Forum Name: General Discussion
Forum Description: (General discussion regarding the next pandemic)
URL: http://www.avianflutalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=43622
Printed Date: April 24 2024 at 2:21pm
Topic: Study of 10 Mil finds no asymptomatic spread
Posted By: AI
Subject: Study of 10 Mil finds no asymptomatic spread
Date Posted: December 29 2020 at 2:58pm
Replies:
Posted By: AI
Date Posted: December 29 2020 at 3:00pm
And a study of 10 million is as comprehensive a study as you will ever see of CoVid.
------------- “Facts don't care about your feelings.” ― Ben Shapiro
|
Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: December 29 2020 at 4:49pm
It looks as if China's obsessive control paid off.
.......'If you believe Chinese reports. (As it happens, I do, but I am sure not everyone will.)
------------- How do you tell if a politician is lying? His lips or pen are moving.
|
Posted By: EdwinSm,
Date Posted: December 29 2020 at 11:49pm
China's controls do seem to have paid off, but I believe they have been "economical with the truth" regarding the over all totals
Almost 5% of the people in the Chinese city of Wuhan may have been infected with Covid-19, a study by researchers at the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention has shown. Wuhan's population is estimated at 11 million, which suggests that almost 500,000 people may have had the virus. If true, that is almost 10 times higher than Wuhan's officially recorded number of 50,354 cases. Asymptomatic cases are not counted in China's official case tally. The study, carried out early this year, took samples from 34,000 people in Wuhan, as well the broader Hubei province, Beijing, Shanghai and four other provinces, said China's CDC in a statement on WeChat. Researchers found an antibody prevalence rate of 4.43% in Wuhan, and a prevalence rate of 0.44% in the broader Hubei province. |
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55481397 But this is still a lot lower than we are seeing in some of the Western countries. The different rates between the city and the surrounding countryside do indicate that the severe lockdown did work.
|
Posted By: AI
Date Posted: December 30 2020 at 1:53pm
Point being the study found zero evidence of asymptomatic spread of the virus. And no doubt their contract tracing methods are as effective as it gets as a totalitarian society. And then you have to ask why would they lie about that aspect, if indeed they are lying about their numbers regarding asymptomatic spread. Nothing to gain lying about it and claiming zero transmission through that aspect of the virus.
------------- “Facts don't care about your feelings.” ― Ben Shapiro
|
Posted By: Technophobe
Date Posted: December 30 2020 at 4:26pm
It is a bit hard to have asymptomatic spread, when almost all asymptomatic people are also virus free. As to why they are virus free - massive lockdowns and social controls.
------------- How do you tell if a politician is lying? His lips or pen are moving.
|
Posted By: AI
Date Posted: December 30 2020 at 10:17pm
Technophobe wrote:
It is a bit hard to have asymptomatic spread, when almost all asymptomatic people are also virus free. As to why they are virus free - massive lockdowns and social controls. | And yet they tested positive for the virus. And that is hardly virus free. Of course then we could have the conversation about what % of positive PCR tests actually contain viable virus.
------------- “Facts don't care about your feelings.” ― Ben Shapiro
|
Posted By: WitchMisspelled
Date Posted: December 31 2020 at 5:58am
Since both the PCR and RT test detect the virus' genetic material, wouldn't that mean that virus is present? Since genetic material needs to be viable to be detected via the PCR and RT test, couldn't the virus be spread?
|
Posted By: AI
Date Posted: December 31 2020 at 8:52pm
WitchMisspelled wrote:
Since both the PCR and RT test detect the virus' genetic material, wouldn't that mean that virus is present? Since genetic material needs to be viable to be detected via the PCR and RT test, couldn't the virus be spread? | The virus does not need to be viable to trigger a positive PCR or RT test.
Remember, all of the testings that we routinely do measures the current or previous presence of COVID-19 RNA. A non-viable virion counts the same as a viable one in these tests, but only viable COVID-19 can transmit the disease from one person to another. https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/25/covid-19-viral-load-and-shedding-update-15177 - https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/11/25/covid-19-viral-load-and-shedding-update-15177
------------- “Facts don't care about your feelings.” ― Ben Shapiro
|
Posted By: WitchMisspelled
Date Posted: January 01 2021 at 5:36am
Thanks, AI. But I'm still confused. If non-viable virons count the same as viable in these tests, then anyone who was ever exposed would count as positive. Why would I not test as positive if I had Covid back in February? Like, say, mononucleosis virus... Because I had it in college, but years later started showing symptoms again, my viral load was counted twice - a week apart to see if it increased. Point being is if the virus is present it is viable if the viral count is increasing and not viable if not increasing. At least that's my understanding. These tests don't count viral load rather whether the virus is present.
|
Posted By: AI
Date Posted: January 01 2021 at 2:23pm
WitchMisspelled wrote:
Thanks, AI. But I'm still confused. If non-viable virons count the same as viable in these tests, then anyone who was ever exposed would count as positive. Why would I not test as positive if I had Covid back in February? Like, say, mononucleosis virus... Because I had it in college, but years later started showing symptoms again, my viral load was counted twice - a week apart to see if it increased. Point being is if the virus is present it is viable if the viral count is increasing and not viable if not increasing. At least that's my understanding. These tests don't count viral load rather whether the virus is present. | Most likely because of the high % of false negative and false positive test results. The tests are not very accurate. Testing done on the same day of both nostrils may result in a positive and negative result. Just because you are positive doesn't mean your viral load is increasing or high. I have a friend who is paraplegic who caught covid and was released from the hospital despite still testing positive per the CDC guidelines. Positive doesn't necessarily mean contagious.
------------- “Facts don't care about your feelings.” ― Ben Shapiro
|
Posted By: carbon20
Date Posted: January 01 2021 at 7:37pm
I would say it's got more to do with who is taking the test from subject, When you see people collecting samples on TV, Sometimes the person puts swab right up the persons nose nearly to the brain, then you see another person taking Sample they hardly go up the nose.... There has to be a better way......
------------- Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted By: carbon20
Date Posted: January 02 2021 at 4:10pm
New Scientist News: Test caught just 3 per cent of students with covid-19 at UK university. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2263746-test-caught-just-3-per-cent-of-students-with-covid-19-at-uk-university/?utm_campaign=RSS%7CNSNS&utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=RSS&utm_content=news - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2263746-test-caught-just-3-per-cent-of-students-with-covid-19-at-uk-university/?utm_campaign=RSS%7CNSNS&utm_source=NSNS&utm_medium=RSS&utm_content=news
------------- Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted By: carbon20
Date Posted: January 03 2021 at 2:41pm
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851 - https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851
------------- Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖
Marcus Aurelius
|
|