Is there any good news in the fight against COVID-19?

[PlatinumGuy]

https://time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread

Sums up everything about COVID. Nobody knows anything for certain.

RT slogan is Question More, because a cornerstone of Russian propaganda is spewing enough misinformation, that nobody believes anything anymore. There is plenty of things we do know, it just takes effort in sifting through it, because modern media allows anybody to broadcast whatever they feel like.

[aygart]

They were saying there is no evidence, and they didn't have it. The world only knew from an HK professor that was in Wuhan by chance.

If they don't have enough sechel to see what everyone already knew then they don't serve much purpose. Were there any consequences from WHO to China for their misinformation or only compliments?

[PlatinumGuy]

If they don't have enough sechel to see what everyone already knew then they don't serve much purpose. Were there any consequences from WHO to China for their misinformation or only compliments?

WHO isn't an investigative or punitive body. It's not in their charter to question China. They are a platform for China to share & communicate with the world.

I agree their communications seem stupid, however I don't think the dynamics of International diplomacy allow for a better organization. Would the US ever allow an international body to investigate or question its internal medical affairs?

[jose34]

Just goes show how little they know.

[PlatinumGuy]

Just goes show how little they know.

That was definitely an absolutely idiotic PR.

[avromie7]

@ckmk47 When you say that, what percent of the population do you imagine is "vulnerable"?  5%?  20%?  75%

I don't think it matters, the fact is the governments are keeping healthy people locked up for no good reason.

Because that strategy worked great for Sweden.

The biggest issue in Sweden and everywhere else was not properly protecting the at risk population.

I wonder if the reason Sweden had so many deaths is because they were infected earlier and didn't have a chance to protect their vulnerable population in time.

I know in the US a nursing home with confirmed positive cases had to wait weeks before being able to test all their residents, that means once it comes in the door it has free reign to spread to the entire home and there was nothing they were able to do about it.

[PlatinumGuy]

So Sweden couldn’t do it right, but we can?

[avromie7]

So Sweden couldn’t do it right, but we can?

And we did do it right?

I believe the issue in both cases was underestimating how much the virus was spreading undetected.

[S209]

You mean down from 5 the week before?

Yes

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html?fbclid=IwAR2QJX3LSJcrO5AQC2Do0qcBYswSoDA8PfU7Tk0LSrWN6rKhXhOFPqcvjwU

There was plenty of evidence of this over the last few weeks and it’s reasonable. What they were originally calling “asymptomatic” usually turned out to be “presymptomatic”. This really only has implications for contact tracing and any guilty feelings you might have harbored if you were indeed asymptomatic (because anybody “asymptomatic” can actually be “presymptomatic” as far as spreading is concerned)

[S209]

I wonder if the reason Sweden had so many deaths is because they were infected earlier and didn't have a chance to protect their vulnerable population in time.

If that was the reason it sure goes against everything everybody knows (especially considering all evidence points to that they weren’t infected before their Nordic neighbors and even Tegnell has openly admitted that knowing what they know now, he wouldn’t have used that approach)? See the Sweden vs. Denmark thread.

ETA: Nothing is impossible but assuming that the differential between Sweden and the others was not policy but purely coincidental because they were infected earlier seems mildly ludicrous, to say the least.

[biobook]

@ckmk47 When you say that, what percent of the population do you imagine is "vulnerable"?  5%?  20%?  75%

I don't think it matters, the fact is the governments are keeping healthy people locked up for no good reason. 

I think it matters very much.  You've made the commendable statement that we should protect the most vulnerable.

Do you imagine that  95% of us need to protect the 5% who are vulnerable?

Or is it that 5% of us need to protect the other 95% who are vulnerable? 

Or something in between?  We should have a sense of just how big this protection job will be.

[PlatinumGuy]

 Sweden proves its impossible to effectively protect the vulnerable

[S209]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html?fbclid=IwAR2QJX3LSJcrO5AQC2Do0qcBYswSoDA8PfU7Tk0LSrWN6rKhXhOFPqcvjwU

And the follow up
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/09/who-scrambles-to-clarify-comments-on-asymptomatic-coronavirus-spread-much-is-still-unknown.html

[S209]

Sweden proves its impossible to effectively protect the vulnerable

Proves is a strong word, but they definitely helped highlight the difficulties

[avromie7]

Sweden proves its impossible to effectively protect the vulnerable

Maybe they were just too slow to act (just like the US) and missed their opportunity.

[S209]

Maybe they were just too slow to act (just like the US) and missed their opportunity.

If they acted at the exact same time as their neighbors they shouldn’t have missed it. Indeed, that’s when they started enforcing the few restrictions they put in place.

[Sam Finkelstein]

https://time.com/5848949/covid-19-asymptomatic-spread

Sums up everything about COVID. Nobody knows anything for certain.

Did you read the study they quoted? No hard data other than a bunch of statistics.

[gozalim]

YesThere was plenty of evidence of this over the last few weeks and it’s reasonable. What they were originally calling “asymptomatic” usually turned out to be “presymptomatic”. This really only has implications for contact tracing and any guilty feelings you might have harbored if you were indeed asymptomatic (because anybody “asymptomatic” can actually be “presymptomatic” as far as spreading is concerned)

another important difference between 'asymptomatic' and 'presymptomatic' would be children, and the risk of opening schools/camps.
that age cohort has been almost completely asymptomatic

[S209]

another important difference between 'asymptomatic' and 'presymptomatic' would be children, and the risk of opening schools/camps.
that age cohort has been almost completely asymptomatic

And indeed, there is plenty of evidence that children are not the chief drivers of the the virus that they were first believed to be

[ckmk47]

@ckmk47 When you say that, what percent of the population do you imagine is "vulnerable"?  5%?  20%?  75%

What percentage of the population should stay home  -  without usual social interactions, income, school, etc - for what percentage that are vulnerable? 
What's your cut off point? What percentage do we, as a society have to twist in pretzels to protect?  And at what point do we pass the responsibility to them?