Asymptomatic = no symptoms, therefore not sneezing or coughing. Which is how this "Virus" is spread. If asymptomatic person has horrible hygiene and person who contracted also has horrible hygiene then I would say its possible. But it would require asymptomatic to damn near lick the other person or feed them their boogers.
Asymptomatic term never passed the smell test for me. It has always seemed to be a fabricated term to make the masses look at strangers like they did in the 80s with HIV/AIDS.
It's a perfect bogeyman to control people and maintain the fear necessary to keep up the hoax which depends on the illusion of a deadly disease. Think about it. If people who don't seem sick at all are spreading it, you can't trust anyone.
Just like the HIV/AIDS crap in the 80s. I was young then, but I remember being told to stay away from that person because they look like they have AIDS or having my parents check my Halloween candy for needles. I grew up in a small farming community and still was taught to fear your neighbor by the local news (nearest big city news).
First, a huge observational study in China says it is very unlikely, to the vanishing point of probability. Few people know about that, though. Second, all year last year there were many efforts trying to determine how COVID was spread, addressing factors such as how long it lives on surfaces, what environmental factors do to that viability, what differences in exposure to others makes(i.e. does social distancing make a difference). Pretty inconclusive considering all the effort to find something, the best results are better air filtration seems more effective than masks or isolation. But all the time the fear is ramped up by media, and I include ignorant opinions on social media. The SM posters may be wrong, deliberately or honestly, but they are influential. All you need now to keep the panic going is that little bit of truth that gives life to evey lie. It is true that asymptomatic people can spread disease, everyone knows about Typhoid Mary. Different disease in every way, but it's enough. Presto, we have a huge unknown body of asymptomatic spreaders, and this could only be proven or refuted by testing absolutely everyone with a reliable test and then relentless contact tracing. A perfect bogeyman.
This is so wrong on so many levels… just to keep it simple, viruses have incubation periods where it is replicating but that is before symptoms would appear… you would still spread the virus during that time period whether coughing, sneezing or picking your nose.
As it isn't airborne beyond in droplet form most flu/cold spread is from lack of hand hygiene and touching surfaces, people touch their eyes/face/mouth without even thinking about it many times every hour, people certainly don't wash their hands as often as they touch their face and a surface afterwards....
A double digit percentage of people don't wash their hands when coming from work or from a trip to the store, and that double digit percentage is realistically not very likely to be on the low side................
As a recent medical grad, I think asymptomatic spread is complete bullshit. When you are asymptomatic, it means that your viral load is low and having a high viral load is what makes you infectious.
Think HIV, where the viral load is measured regularly to see if your HIV is under control. With an undetectable viral load, your ability to infect someone else is far under 1%. Coronavirus is still a virus and thus still operates by the standard framework of virology and medicine, so it would still follow these basic principles.
Isn’t HIV a perfect example of asymptomatic transmission? There are drugs that can lower the viral load, but there are also those from early during epidemic that only helped ease symptoms. There were many times people were not exhibiting symptoms yet they were spreading the virus at incredibly high rates. I’m not claiming to be a doctor but I think you are misunderstanding the relationship between viral load and symptoms…
HIV is different because it doesn't cause you to have a cough, or fairly visible symptoms, instead it shreds your CD4 count and makes you immunosuppressed. This is why many people can have high viral loads and while themselves and others are not be able to tell that they are sick.
Because it would manifest by them having a higher chance of getting things like lymphadenopathy (hard to detect sometimes), diarrhea (non specific, some people would brush it off), and things like candidal infections (it is natural flora but our immune system keeps it under control, unless you are immunosuppressed)
The other big one is body aches. How many people have chronic body aches? This is why you can technically be having symptoms but not have them be severe enough to catch your attention. - this is what people may call asymptomatic, but the likely reality is that they are not aware of their symptoms bc HIV can be "low key".
isn't the whole basis for these vaccines is that they suppress the symptoms?
I don't know what to trust anymore - some doctors saying the vaccines are supposed to be priming your body's immunity system to respond to the infection.
Okay, if that's so than your body shouldn't be tolerating any significant viral load without triggering an immune response.
So in theory the "inactivated" spike protein in the vaccines is what primes your body to create antibodies to it, leading to some type of immunity.
The main issue I have is that increased blood clots, myocarditis, etc - the biggest adverse effects of the vaccines so far seem to be things that are related to the spike protein itself. So completely inactivated? - doesn't look like it at all. Another scary thing is that there is evidence the spike protein can cross the blood brain barrier. It should not be doing that and could be contributing to things like cerebral venous thrombosis, strokes and covid/vaccine "brain fog".
but if that was the case, you shouldn't be seeing vaccinated people with any significant viral loads right? I mean if the immune system is primed to recognize the infection, it should be yeeting the virus immediately and not allowing any build up - or am I misunderstanding this?
Asymptomatic = no symptoms, therefore not sneezing or coughing. Which is how this "Virus" is spread. If asymptomatic person has horrible hygiene and person who contracted also has horrible hygiene then I would say its possible. But it would require asymptomatic to damn near lick the other person or feed them their boogers.
Asymptomatic term never passed the smell test for me. It has always seemed to be a fabricated term to make the masses look at strangers like they did in the 80s with HIV/AIDS.
It's a perfect bogeyman to control people and maintain the fear necessary to keep up the hoax which depends on the illusion of a deadly disease. Think about it. If people who don't seem sick at all are spreading it, you can't trust anyone.
Just like the HIV/AIDS crap in the 80s. I was young then, but I remember being told to stay away from that person because they look like they have AIDS or having my parents check my Halloween candy for needles. I grew up in a small farming community and still was taught to fear your neighbor by the local news (nearest big city news).
And what do you call Rock Hudson, in a wheelchair?
I thought they said there was no asymptomatic transmission. Especially since the test is bunk.
First, a huge observational study in China says it is very unlikely, to the vanishing point of probability. Few people know about that, though. Second, all year last year there were many efforts trying to determine how COVID was spread, addressing factors such as how long it lives on surfaces, what environmental factors do to that viability, what differences in exposure to others makes(i.e. does social distancing make a difference). Pretty inconclusive considering all the effort to find something, the best results are better air filtration seems more effective than masks or isolation. But all the time the fear is ramped up by media, and I include ignorant opinions on social media. The SM posters may be wrong, deliberately or honestly, but they are influential. All you need now to keep the panic going is that little bit of truth that gives life to evey lie. It is true that asymptomatic people can spread disease, everyone knows about Typhoid Mary. Different disease in every way, but it's enough. Presto, we have a huge unknown body of asymptomatic spreaders, and this could only be proven or refuted by testing absolutely everyone with a reliable test and then relentless contact tracing. A perfect bogeyman.
This is so wrong on so many levels… just to keep it simple, viruses have incubation periods where it is replicating but that is before symptoms would appear… you would still spread the virus during that time period whether coughing, sneezing or picking your nose.
Note to self....."stop eating boogers"
FTFY. Eating your own is just fine. In fact, it should be encouraged: https://www.menshealth.com/health/a19546352/eating-boogers-good-for-you/
🤮🤣
Just don't do it on national tv like Joe Biden. It looks gross, and no amount of science will change that.
I actually laughed out loud at "feed them their boogers". Still laughing and thanks for that.
As it isn't airborne beyond in droplet form most flu/cold spread is from lack of hand hygiene and touching surfaces, people touch their eyes/face/mouth without even thinking about it many times every hour, people certainly don't wash their hands as often as they touch their face and a surface afterwards....
A double digit percentage of people don't wash their hands when coming from work or from a trip to the store, and that double digit percentage is realistically not very likely to be on the low side................
As a recent medical grad, I think asymptomatic spread is complete bullshit. When you are asymptomatic, it means that your viral load is low and having a high viral load is what makes you infectious.
Think HIV, where the viral load is measured regularly to see if your HIV is under control. With an undetectable viral load, your ability to infect someone else is far under 1%. Coronavirus is still a virus and thus still operates by the standard framework of virology and medicine, so it would still follow these basic principles.
Isn’t HIV a perfect example of asymptomatic transmission? There are drugs that can lower the viral load, but there are also those from early during epidemic that only helped ease symptoms. There were many times people were not exhibiting symptoms yet they were spreading the virus at incredibly high rates. I’m not claiming to be a doctor but I think you are misunderstanding the relationship between viral load and symptoms…
Except it’s transmitted by bodily fluids. Even if you don’t have symptoms, you are, ahem, “injecting” your fluids into another person.
With COVID, you are only being exposed to aerosol drops, which don’t occur without coughing or sneezing (symptoms).
Understood the transmission method is different, I’m simply highlighting that viruses can be spread without the host exhibiting symptoms.
HIV is different because it doesn't cause you to have a cough, or fairly visible symptoms, instead it shreds your CD4 count and makes you immunosuppressed. This is why many people can have high viral loads and while themselves and others are not be able to tell that they are sick.
Because it would manifest by them having a higher chance of getting things like lymphadenopathy (hard to detect sometimes), diarrhea (non specific, some people would brush it off), and things like candidal infections (it is natural flora but our immune system keeps it under control, unless you are immunosuppressed)
The other big one is body aches. How many people have chronic body aches? This is why you can technically be having symptoms but not have them be severe enough to catch your attention. - this is what people may call asymptomatic, but the likely reality is that they are not aware of their symptoms bc HIV can be "low key".
Treating people IRL is a different ball game
isn't the whole basis for these vaccines is that they suppress the symptoms?
I don't know what to trust anymore - some doctors saying the vaccines are supposed to be priming your body's immunity system to respond to the infection.
Okay, if that's so than your body shouldn't be tolerating any significant viral load without triggering an immune response.
So in theory the "inactivated" spike protein in the vaccines is what primes your body to create antibodies to it, leading to some type of immunity.
The main issue I have is that increased blood clots, myocarditis, etc - the biggest adverse effects of the vaccines so far seem to be things that are related to the spike protein itself. So completely inactivated? - doesn't look like it at all. Another scary thing is that there is evidence the spike protein can cross the blood brain barrier. It should not be doing that and could be contributing to things like cerebral venous thrombosis, strokes and covid/vaccine "brain fog".
but if that was the case, you shouldn't be seeing vaccinated people with any significant viral loads right? I mean if the immune system is primed to recognize the infection, it should be yeeting the virus immediately and not allowing any build up - or am I misunderstanding this?
Unvaxxed asymptomatic= safe to others (no spreading covid )
Vaxxed asymptomatic= spreading covid to others without knowing.
Depends on the day doesn't it? Kek