Transmission of COVID-19 by People With no Symptoms Did NOT Occur at All

[BADecker]

I’m guessing that many people don’t know what “asymptomatic” means. It means “no symptoms.”

It's turning out that only the CDC - and those influenced by the CDC - state that there is Covid transmission by asymptomatic people. Not even China is crazy enough to state something like that.


Transmission of COVID-19 by People With no Symptoms Did NOT Occur at All

So when they see the headline "Asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 didn't occur at all, study of 10 million finds," they don't understand how important that news is. It means, "Why in the hell are we locked down?"

According to a new study of almost 10 million people in Wuhan, China, asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 did not occur at all. Not at all! In other words, people displaying no symptoms did not spread the disease at all. Not at all.  This undermines the need for lockdowns, which are built on the premise of the virus being unwittingly spread by infectious, asymptomatic people (people without any symptoms).

Published in November in the scientific journal Nature Communications, the paper was compiled by scientists from the Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, as well as from scientific institutions across China, the U.K. and Australia. It focused on the residents of Wuhan, ground zero for COVID-19, where 9,899,828 people took part in a screening program between May 14 and June 1, which provided clear results as to the possibility of any asymptomatic transmission of the virus.

The study stated that out of the nearly 10 million people in the study, "300 asymptomatic cases" were found. Contact tracing was then carried out and of those 300. No cases of COVID-19 were detected in any of them.

None!

"A total of 1,174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19."

[Gyfts]

You have a small amount of truth hidden in this post.

Asymptomatic spread has never been the cause for much concern. We knew this months ago, and Dr. Fauci has admitted as much. Someone that's asymptomatic presumably isn't creating as many bodily fluids (sneezing, coughing, ect) so they won't end up causing as much spread.

The batshit insanity comes in when you say that asymptomatic spread does not occur at all. Doesn't happen to be true. So you're about 1/4th right.

[BADecker]

^^^ Well, if you want to get batshit crazy technical about it...

Person A has no symptoms today. But tomorrow his symptoms will show up.

Person B doesn't have Covid, but gets a blood transfusion from Person A today.

Person B might get symptoms a couple weeks down the road.

[franky1]

again. although its been said in other topics. badecker likes to make new topics just to repeat his crap.

so lets deal with it one more time. before he forgets

out of the so called 50% that badecker think are asymptomatic. they are not actually all true asymptomatic
it works out that ~30% are pre-symptomatic. meaning that they will get sick and incubate and spread the virus but they were just questioned about it too soon
10% are minor symptomatic. instead of the 3 main 'mild symptoms they may only have 1 and so very minor they dont realise it.
then there is about 10% that have no incubation/symptoms/reactions

but in all categories.. and even in this final 10% that may not spread it via their breath/mucus, still do spread it if they touch/hug a sick person and get it on their hands/skin clothes and then touch another person. they can pass it on via touch

this is why for 9 months america has been saying wash your hands dont touch your face. and keep your space.

its not been 9 months of 'dont cough spit or sneeze if you got the disease'

yep because even if you think you dont have the disease incubating you can still pass it on by touch/proximity
s even when not sick you may not feel anything on your lungs.. but you still have to worry about your skin and clothing and things you touch

[BADecker]

^^^ Thanks, franky1. If what I say was unimportant, you wouldn't feel the need to respond. So, what I say must be important since you talk against it. I appreciate you, brother.

[franky1]

^^^ Thanks, franky1. If what I say was unimportant, you wouldn't feel the need to respond. So, what I say must be important since you talk against it. I appreciate you, brother.

when you get something wrong but then repeat it even after being corrected then i make a point to emphasise how wrong you are

[BADecker]

^^^ Thanks, franky1. If what I say was unimportant, you wouldn't feel the need to respond. So, what I say must be important since you talk against it. I appreciate you, brother.

when you get something wrong but then repeat it even after being correct then i make a point to emphasise how wrong you are

Wow! I didn't know I was so much like you. After all, I do the same with you, right?

However, when you get something wrong, but then repeat it even after being correct... you don't even make sense.

Thanks.

[franky1]

^^^ Thanks, franky1. If what I say was unimportant, you wouldn't feel the need to respond. So, what I say must be important since you talk against it. I appreciate you, brother.

when you get something wrong but then repeat it even after being correct then i make a point to emphasise how wrong you are

Wow! I didn't know I was so much like you. After all, I do the same with you, right?

However, when you get something wrong, but then repeat it even after being correct... you don't even make sense.

Thanks.

you have not been correct.
you have been corrected. debunked. pointed out where you are wrong