zlacker

CNN sold us on asymptomatic spread but it’s actually highly unlikely: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w

>>mrfusi+(OP)
I personally know people who went to a party and got sick from an asymptomatic person.

>>geoduc+E9
Why was this down voted?

>>mrfusi+(OP)
I've seen this study shared around anti-vaxer groups trying to claim that asymptomatic spread is unlikely. But this study does not prove that at all. They screened 10 million people with no symptoms, and found 300 asymptomatic cases. Then they re-screened 1200 contacts of those cases and didn't find any more cases that they missed. This doesn't prove that asymptomatic spread is unlikely. It proves that the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 when they did the screening was very low, and that 100% of the cases they found were asymptomatic. I'd be careful to draw conclusions from just one Chinese study, but if anything, this study suggests the opposite of what you're claiming.

>>geoduc+7D
You really have tabs on all the innumerable factors involved in a scenario where someone goes to a party and later becomes infected - and pinpoint the reason ?

>>yosito+dk1
I can’t quite follow the line of reasoning here. Can you simplify or rephrase?

(Also nice touch to question the credibility by associating it with anti vaxxers)

That’s by no means the only study though. Here’s a meta-analysis of 54 studies (link to paper is in article)

https://alachuachronicle.com/university-of-florida-researche...

>>mrfusi+N63
> I can’t quite follow the line of reasoning here. Can you simplify or rephrase?

I was pretty clear, and so was the original study you linked from nature.com. If you can't follow the reasoning of something that simple, should anyone take your claims to be coming from someone who knows what they're talking about?

From the second meta-study you linked:

> We found significantly higher secondary attack rates from symptomatic index cases than asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases, although less data were available on the latter. The lack of substantial transmission from observed asymptomatic index cases is notable. However, presymptomatic transmission does occur, with some studies reporting the timing of peak infectiousness at approximately the period of symptom onset.

They state very clearly that though their analysis showed a lower secondary attack rate from asymptomatic index cases (0.7-4.9%), they have limited data from which to draw that conclusion, and that presymptomatic transmission does occur. Which means, you can catch SARS-CoV-2 from someone who doesn't know that they're sick.

That's according to the study you linked, and it's far from the claim you made that asymptomatic spread is "actually highly unlikely".

>>vixen9+Bk1
At the party, there were 42 people present. 16 got sick. In many cases husbands got sick first, then wives. All of these are in a close social network (they either work together, or are married to an employee) - so keeping tabs on each other is very likely. Many of them were socially distancing before hand (I can attest to 4 of them, directly) - so external infections are unlikely, but possible.

Due to the timing, the general consensus is that the husbands contacted the disease from one male (close hugging or extended talking) and then gave it to their wives that night.