WHO says asymptomatic transmission of COVID19 is rare

gc70 said:
I have thought asymptomatic transmission was a major factor in C19's spread - WHO's denial confirms it for me.
Click to expand...

lol...I heard white people are the primary cause of spreading it. Its transmitted across our 400mbs white privilege download frequency directly into minority nursing homes.
 
Last edited:
The North Carolina Secretary of Health just said that as much as 49% of transmission is by asymptomatic carriers.

So who is right?
 
Last edited:
Lying bunch of donkey poo. Think long and hard about this....just by chance this happened or just a really really bad flu for people who were already very sick. How many loved ones died alone. People will pay for this when the world ends. What is the fire marshals capacity limit in hell?
 
Timing is good. Y'know, now the riots are safer. For sure.
 
Wait, I thought the WHO were in China pocket?? That's what Trump said when he cut of funding.

So now they are on the Republican payroll and not the Democrats?

I don't know who to believe. I am just glad its not real and only fake people have died.
 
mj1angier said:
Wait, I thought the WHO were in China pocket??
Click to expand...
Bingo. The WHO is in China’s pocket, now more so as the US is threatening to defund them. What better way for a China if their goal is to weaken the US as much as possible than to use propaganda to convince people the virus is a hoax or they’re safe from contracting it so that they act in a manner to maximize the spread.
 
That goes against a lot of test results that came out when limited samples were 100% tested, there were several ships that came back, had everybody tested and about 20% of people had it but were entirely asymptomatic. Shake Head.
 
noway2 said:
Asymptomatic or not, the honey badger virus is accelerating in its spread again: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Click to expand...
2% dangerous

98% mild

90% recovered
0b134085b96088f48eaec8f3f8eb9c9d.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ikarus1 said:
2% dangerous

98% mild

90% recovered
0b134085b96088f48eaec8f3f8eb9c9d.jpg
Click to expand...

While I dont want to make it sound like I believe it is more deadly than it is, one thing that has been a bit misrepresented is the definition of "mild". Mild just meant "We dont have to put you in the hospital." The few people I have known to have had the virus describe it as nearly a month of living hell. So "mild" isnt necessarily "I just had a wee cough for a few days and was fine..." it is up to weeks of being bedridden.
 
B00ger said:
While I dont want to make it sound like I believe it is more deadly than it is, one thing that has been a bit misrepresented is the definition of "mild". Mild just meant "We dont have to put you in the hospital." The few people I have known to have had the virus describe it as nearly a month of living hell. So "mild" isnt necessarily "I just had a wee cough for a few days and was fine..." it is up to weeks of being bedridden.
Click to expand...

yep a buddy of mine had it and said it was hell and I quote “I wouldn’t wish that sh!t upon no one” and he’s a healthy 25 year old
 
B00ger said:
While I dont want to make it sound like I believe it is more deadly than it is, one thing that has been a bit misrepresented is the definition of "mild". Mild just meant "We dont have to put you in the hospital." The few people I have known to have had the virus describe it as nearly a month of living hell. So "mild" isnt necessarily "I just had a wee cough for a few days and was fine..." it is up to weeks of being bedridden.
Click to expand...

But the narrative behind the lockdown was OMGGGGG THE HOSPITALSSSSSS

98% mild cases aren't overwhelming the US medical system. 90% recovery rate means this is no Spanish Flu.

Lift the restrictions on healthy and asymptomatic people, because the data and science isn't supporting it.
 
If anything, the total number of cases and number of asymptomatic cases are both higher than what we have confirmed. Maybe even much higher. Likewise, we know the US death total is artificially high.

All data point to this not being anywhere near as bad as we were told it was going to be. Doesn’t mean it is fun to have. Doesn’t mean people don’t die from it. But, the asymptomatic and “we haven’t tested enough people” boogeymen make this less scary, not more.
 
Ikarus1 said:
But the narrative behind the lockdown was OMGGGGG THE HOSPITALSSSSSS

98% mild cases aren't overwhelming the US medical system. 90% recovery rate means this is no Spanish Flu.

Lift the restrictions on healthy and asymptomatic people, because the data and science isn't supporting it.
Click to expand...

Kinda more or less. I am OK with opening everything, but letting individual businesses decide how they want to do it. The data does support that restrictions lowers the rate, and it 'flattens the curve' for hospitals. But, if it's truly mild in >90% of the population the benefit of the restrictions do not outweigh the risk of the massive lockdowns and restrictions.

We were hovering at a certain number of inpatients, dropping from about 8% if COVID + inpatients to about 4%, now we're back around 10% and it's climbing. As restrictions get lifted we'll see the numbers rise again.
 
Ikarus1 said:
But the narrative behind the lockdown was OMGGGGG THE HOSPITALSSSSSS

98% mild cases aren't overwhelming the US medical system. 90% recovery rate means this is no Spanish Flu.

Lift the restrictions on healthy and asymptomatic people, because the data and science isn't supporting it.
Click to expand...

No doubt, never said it was. But there is a common theme amongst people that "mild case" means "like having a bad cold" when that isnt true. Its spending a month just slightly not sick enough to need a hospital.
 
B00ger said:
No doubt, never said it was. But there is a common theme amongst people that "mild case" means "like having a bad cold" when that isnt true. Its spending a month just slightly not sick enough to need a hospital.
Click to expand...


For some, for sure. There are also accounts out there that it was like a cold for them. Different people, different immune systems, different initial virus loads, maybe even different strains all mean different experiences. Like lots of other diseases. Some people have a hard time. Some don’t. And everything in between.
 
cubrock said:
For some, for sure. There are also accounts out there that it was like a cold for them. Different people, different immune systems, different initial virus loads, maybe even different strains all mean different experiences. Like lots of other diseases. Some people have a hard time. Some don’t. And everything in between.
Click to expand...

And again, I dont disagree, nor doubt that. Just commenting that to many "mild" doesnt mean "almost needing hospitalization".
 
If I took all cases we've seen and graphed them, outpatient and inpatient, it would be a skewed curve. People with the truly "mild" (as in a cold or URI) are younger, and the symptoms last shorter. But even if younger and worse-than-"just mild", the symptoms last longer. The people we've seen that are in the "like a bad cold" are the minority; most, regardless of age, had significant symptoms for 3 weeks to over a month. The people hospitalized? Horrible symptoms. Very rough.
 
Chuckman said:
If I took all cases we've seen and graphed them, outpatient and inpatient, it would be a skewed curve. People with the truly "mild" (as in a cold or URI) are younger, and the symptoms last shorter. But even if younger and worse-than-"just mild", the symptoms last longer. The people we've seen that are in the "like a bad cold" are the minority; most, regardless of age, had significant symptoms for 3 weeks to over a month. The people hospitalized? Horrible symptoms. Very rough.
Click to expand...

Do you think there is some, maybe even a lot of skewing there by people with milder symptoms not going to the hospital? I know I would have to feel like death warmed over before I went to the doctor, much less a hospital. I’ve always been that way and I know a lot of men (and my wife) are like me in that regard.
 
B00ger said:
And again, I dont disagree, nor doubt that. Just commenting that to many "mild" doesnt mean "almost needing hospitalization".
Click to expand...

I’m not disagreeing with you, either. Just adding some thoughts to the conversation.
 
cubrock said:
Do you think there is some, maybe even a lot of skewing there by people with milder symptoms not going to the hospital? I know I would have to feel like death warmed over before I went to the doctor, much less a hospital. I’ve always been that way and I know a lot of men (and my wife) are like me in that regard.
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely. That is always a problem with data collection (as is the symptomatic crowd). The things that separates this from other illnesses, including the flu, is severity and duration. If it is mild, like really mild, even like a mild flu, a lot of people aren't going to get tested, because they aren't going to go to the doctor. Me, I know if I am feeling like crap at 7 days (flu-ish), then I need to make sure it isn't the flu, so I will go in (my doc, or urgent care).

In general though, although there are people like you, me, others (not going to the doctor unless I am dead or nearly), it balances with those who go with the slightest sniffle.

The rule of thumb is if you have flu-like symptoms that get no better or worsen around day 5, you need to get checked out. Make that day 3 if there is a fever unabated with aspirin or tylenol. This is why we 'think' COVID was here at the end of 2019. I had co-workers out with ILI ("Influenza-like Illness"), basically the flu with negative for the flu. They were down and out for 2, 3 weeks.
 
B00ger said:
No doubt, never said it was. But there is a common theme amongst people that "mild case" means "like having a bad cold" when that isnt true. Its spending a month just slightly not sick enough to need a hospital.
Click to expand...
Don't forget that the after effects, such as diminished lung capacity, can be long lasting if not permanent.

charliesgrave said:
From what I'm seeing, a month is about how long it runs in bad cases as well. We've had some otherwise healthy people spend over 30 days in an ICU bed before we could get their oxygen requirements low enough to send them home.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, how has the science of treatment changed, if at all, over the last several months? Initially the thought was that people needed mechanical ventilation but they started realizing that it was more of a clotting disorder and that ventilating put a lot of pressure on the left ventricle and rather anticoagulants (heparin ?) may help. Then there is the whole hydroxychlorquine versus Remdesivir debate. The idea of medical science coming down to political and financial gain is sickening. Same question for @Chuckman
 
Last edited:
charliesgrave said:
Treatment hasn't changed very much that I can see.

The hydroxy/remdesivir debate is not a debate at all. At least in critical patients (which is all I'm seeing) neither of these drugs are having any effect, save for some deleterious ones from hydroxychloroquine. I can't honestly say how viable these might be for someone on day 1 of symptoms, but in full blown infections, they aren't the silver bullet Fox news is claiming they are.

A lot of the real debate when it comes to care I'm seeing among pulmonologists and critical care doctors right now is when to actually intubate a patient. In patients who will likely have poor outcomes with mechanical ventilation, they're throwing as much o2 therapy at them as they can trying to keep them from going on a vent. I've seen both good and bad results from this. Generally, we can keep these patients on the low side of acceptable for oxygenation, but their respiratory rate and work of breathing can catch up with them. You can only breath 40 times a minute for so long before you or your heart wears out. What it comes down to is a case by case scrutiny of the patient from literally minute to minute.

I am not seeing that this is a clotting disorder at all, save for a single patient who had a stroke during their course in the hospital. That patient was receiving anticoagulants, as they were at risk of that outcome without Covid's help anyway. That's not a tally mark for a clotting disorder.
It's a complex morass of numbers and values when you start talking about how ventilation affects cardiac output. This usually has to do with the high peep pressures that are required to ventilate and oxygenate some of these people on the ventilator. It's really more a problem for hemodynamically unstable patients, and you will see their BP tank as the pressure go up.

The only real take away I can give is that we still don't know anything concrete. Why does a seemingly healthy 30 or 40 year old spend a month dieing and an elderly person with tons of comorbidities present with no symptoms at all? I've seen both of these types of patients several times already.
It all seems entirely random. There's something we haven't picked up on yet that is a determining factor between those who get hit hard and those who don't, and I don't think it's viral load.
For example, as a cross section of what I'm talking about, we had two patients present from the same workplace on the same day. About the same age. The one who had a couple pre-existing medical conditions went home after a couple days. The other with no conditions, died shortly thereafter.

I don't want Covid. If you guys are smart, you'll do what you can to ensure you don't get it. You can parade out all the mortality percentages you want, but that means diddly squat when you win the bad lottery. You might be miserable for a month and survive, you might be miserable for a month and die. You might be miserable for a month and go home with wrecked lungs and on oxygen for the rest of your days. You might get supremely lucky and have minimal or no symptoms. I don't want to roll the dice if I don't have to.
Click to expand...

Kinda agree, but none of us want a head cold, flu or bronchitis either. We still go out and live our lives. Lots of risks out there. At risk people should be cautious and self quarantine as much as possible. Only seems prudent. Young healthy people should go out and keep the economy going. I am certainly no expert but from what I have read is that the hydroxychlroquine/zine/z-pack combo works very well early. If you wait too long they are not effective. Your results may vary, I did not stay in a Holiday Inn or graduate from medical school so good luck.
 
The data on anti-malarials is not settled. There have been some good results, but also some not good results. I am not sold. Remdesivir is great; at least the data I have seen.

Agreed, they try very hard to not pull the trigger on mechanical ventilation because when they do, it's often a bad outcome.

The confounding things are, why are people getting clotting disorders? This is not settled; lot's of hypotheses. These aren't old people, either, this is is young, healthy people. We don't know what the long-term sequelae will be.
 
ppirate said:
Lying bunch of donkey poo. Think long and hard about this....just by chance this happened or just a really really bad flu for people who were already very sick. How many loved ones died alone. People will pay for this when the world ends. What is the fire marshals capacity limit in hell?
Click to expand...
I'm afraid his name is not Mr. Fire Marshal. And there is no capacity limit.
Just saying
 
Last edited:
Barnes 5.56 said:
Does anyone on this board know what the World Health Organisation's role globally? Who will raise there hand first??
Click to expand...
The UN entity for coordinating leadership on health concerns globally. They spiked the football on Smallpox, and released (or looked the other way) on several other viruses like H1N1, SARS, MERS, and now SARS-COV-2 (CoVid-19). They also failed on HIV as well.

Big budget without teeth, and possibly infiltrated by bad actors, so IOW just another tool in the globalists' arsenal
 
Last edited:
Barnes 5.56 said:
Winner! This is a subject that hardly anyone knows anything about.
So Pandemic bonds rings a bell then? Right?
Click to expand...

Bloomberg (the publication not the failed Mayor) wrote a pretty good article about it in Feb 2020 before the US caught the WuFlu. I can't cut and paste due to my firewall but it's great
 
Martin Armstrong is another one to read articles from. Armstrong Economics blog.
Finally a kindred spirit. Almost 100% percent of the people I talk to look at me with a glazed look in their eyes when I mention "pandemic bonds"
 
I have had the (dis)pleasure of working with some WHO people. Like a lot of organizations, it has some good people, but the good gets sacrificed for the sake of the organization. Like most bureaucratically-heavy organizations, it has some worthless people. Like most (all?) UN organizations, it is top-heavy, cumbersome, and fully loyal to the Global UN World Order.
 
The WHO sold Pandemic bonds, a value of about 500 million, separated into two bonds. One was at a interest rate of 11.5%. The other was about 7%. The WHO raises this money to supposedly support third world countries when a pandemic or epidemic hits that particular country. But where they "spike the ball" or turn their head the other way, is when they keep the money and say they will use it to fight the pandemic, and all, to conspire with china (in our case) and social marxist democrats and the like (CDC) to create a coronavirus (and there are many) to distract the gullable American People (thanks to social media and main stream media) to convince us and on purpose exagerate the numbers to hide the fact that the global economy was going to crash. The world banks were not reciprocating loans because the confidence models were not favorable from one bank to the other. Cash was being held up and people started hoarding money and the reciprocating process came to an approaching halt. Banks were not buying and selling loans. That's how the global economy works. The confidence is slowing because of the astronomical debt we are in as a nation not counting the rest of the world. What I am describing to you who ever is listening is called... The Repo Market.
Some political figures in congress knew it was coming thats why they sold stocks and etc. so they wouldn't lose money.
Listen... Former President Isenhour warned us that these elite people existed in his day and Kennedy warned us in the 60's that these key elite organizations and people still exist. Their agenda is totalitarianism on a global scale. And what more convincing could it be to create something of such magnificent brilliance as a scheme, than a global virus to stage a cou to remove a president from office.
What this board has been talking about is spread of the virus on surfaces and how it effects the body of different age groups, and I'm not minimizing your thoughts on the subject at all. It is real no doubt. But the truth is that it had to come from somewhere and there has to an agenda and the globalist are reaching there goals at the expense of lives all over the world and at times close to some of you. My deffinate prayers are your way. But please know that this pandemic was no surprise to those under the nose of a republican president or a democratic president. It doesn't matter what side is occupying the throne. These elite people still exist. They will cause all of what you see in the arena of division and hate among us in our nation and the rest of the world. The hate will continue and pandora's box will open a little wider and a little wider as truth will continue to be eliminated in the minds of our younger generations as they walk into a dark room of what a Republic used to be. We will walk off in the shadows of a once great nation by which George Washington would thunder the words "by life or by death"!!!! We however have not the resolve he did.
 
Last edited:
At some point and time, we as freedom loving people, have to come to the conclusion that mainstream and popularization, equals polarization. These three things has destroyed many nations in history. We need to have a paradigm shift of thinking. Mainstream anything is always bad. Any "popular" expression or phrase or law or paragraph will never be trust worthy of your interest or intellect, except for making a conscious decision to reject or except. Be a free thinker. Be vigilant enough to come to your own conclusions and not allow CNN or FOX news or the like to dominate your mind.
The truth of our political situation as a nation whether its at home or Geo-politacally will never be easy to find. Truth will always be hard to access in any part of the world. Dont think for one minute that mainstream news is telling you the truth. The Fairness Doctorine that was signed into law in 1954 was done away with under the Reagen administration in 1985. "That should peak your interest". The mainstream news outlets only put out sensationalist stories that draw a crowd. They have no regard for telling the truth. If they do tell the truth from time to time it is only to keep us watching. Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch are very rich people at the expense of American lives and minds. Sounds familiar don't it?
Be vigilant, be sober, the roaring lion is coming to devour, to wreck and to ruin any in his path.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom