My politics have nothing to do with this. I just want to know the truth, Lou. I've been going along with the shutdown and the social distancing and the mask wearing and the hand washing like a good soldier, thinking that I'm doing the right thing, even though it mostly feels wrong.Lou Jost wrote: Ray, I am just looking at the literature. I don't have a party. On the other hand I think you are inclined to give undue weight to claims that support your libertarian positions.
Lou...you don't really think that what you linked to is "science" or "literature", do you? I see the phrases:There are many studies, including very recent ones, about the contagiousness of non-symptomatic persons. A nice review is here: https://www.health.com/condition/infect ... oronavirus.
It seems to be the scientific consensus that people who do not show symptoms are important vectors of the disease. There is argument about the exact percentage. But the findings of contact tracing confirm that asymptomatic persons are contagious.
"Based on current assumptions"
"seems to be more prevalent than previously imagined"
"An early instance of possible asymptomatic spread"
"may count for a significant amount"
"who reportedly spread the virus"
"The sequence of events suggests that the coronavirus may have been transmitted by the asymptomatic carrier"
"We used outbreak data from clusters in Singapore and Tianjin,China to estimate the generation interval from symptom onset data whileacknowledging uncertainty about the incubation period distribution and theunderlying transmission network."
"Estimating generation and serial interval distributions from outbreak
data requires careful investigation of the underlying transmission network."
Even the title of the Dutch paper leaves me speechless:
"Transmission interval estimates suggest pre-symptomatic spread of COVID-19"
There is NO SCIENCE in these papers, just a bunch of researchers looking at incomplete data and drawing likely incorrect conclusions from it. At best what they have are hypotheses.