Positive *Informative* Covid News
- Thread starter madguy30
- Start date
- Status
It's great if they can find that being without any symptoms at any time is less transmission, but how does one know if they're asymp or presymp and can someone still spread it when presymp?
Imo this is going to lead to less testing and the assumption/campaign that there's less cases.
Agreed. Has anyone seen the reasoning that CDC is basing this switch upon? It said testing wasn't necessary if asymptomatic, but that CDC mitigation protocols should still be adhered to. Does that mean they still recommend isolation for 10 days after a known exposure, just that a test isn't necessary?
Most encouraged by not having to 10-14 day quarantine (missed school, work, appt as a result ) because you had contact with someone with a positive test.
I'm looking now...is there concrete evidence that it won't spread without symptoms/presymp?
Seems like they're saying in the tweet above that you don't have to worry if you have no symptoms, but this is on the bottom of the CDC's page:
"It is important to realize that you can be infected and spread the virus but feel well and have no symptoms.
- In areas where there are limited number of new cases, State or local public health officials may request to test a small number of asymptomatic “healthy people,” particularly from vulnerable populations.
- If there is significant spread of the virus in your community, State or local public health officials may request to test more asymptomatic “healthy people,” particularly from vulnerable populations."
I'm looking now...is there concrete evidence that it won't spread without symptoms/presymp?
Seems like they're saying in the tweet above that you don't have to worry if you have no symptoms, but this is on the bottom of the CDC's page:
"It is important to realize that you can be infected and spread the virus but feel well and have no symptoms.
- In areas where there are limited number of new cases, State or local public health officials may request to test a small number of asymptomatic “healthy people,” particularly from vulnerable populations.
- If there is significant spread of the virus in your community, State or local public health officials may request to test more asymptomatic “healthy people,” particularly from vulnerable populations."
I think the position on pre and a symptomatic has moved over the months. But I am certainly ok with the recommendations cited by the CDC by continued asymptomatic testing in areas of concern or higher populations of vulnerable people.
In there, the CDC says you still need to be cautious if you don't have symptoms when coming into contact with someone who has COVID. They're just saying if you're not showing any symptoms, there's no reason for you to be tested.
That is where using the percent positives gets messy. The first few months may have been lower than they actually were. I knew a few people who were nervous, went in and lied that they had a fever the night before and took some ibuprofen and got tested and came back negative. Those were driving case percentages down. Now, I think people have a decent idea that driving past someone who is positive is probably extremely rare to transmit it to you and the nervous testing has stopped. As testing goes down, the percentage will most likely go up until the virus starts its decline.
Yeah, you can’t force people to get tested. I keep getting the follow-up survey from TestIowa, answer every question in the negative, and at the end I still qualify to be tested. It’s like they’re down to begging people right now. And/or they’re looking for some likely negatives to mix in with the positives.
I think as people have become more informed and made their own adjustments to lower their risk they've been less inclined to get tested.
Imo testing sites should still be opened but perhaps cut back to save money and have the option to open up more if there's a surge.
Where are you seeing this? I'm having a hard time finding similar language in the CDC guidance. This would be a game changer for schools, potentially.
I didn't see that. It mentioned that known exposures (15+min of close contact to confirmed cases) didn't necessarily have to be tested if asymptomatic, but they should still follow CDC mitigation protocols. I interpret that as the 10 day quarantine.
Edit: I was wrong. The mitigation protocols are just try to distance, washing hands, and wearing a mask. Nothing on the quarantine period.
Last edited:
A little surprised that this hasn't popped up today as it seems like bad news but could actually be positive if the 'reinfection' is found to come with no symptoms/effects. What I'd like to know is how contagious someone is if this happens.
Key part from the article:
Although the 33-year-old tested positive for COVID-19 a second time, multiple experts have pointed out that he showed no symptoms — which may be good news. “This is no cause for alarm — this is a textbook example of how immunity should work,” tweeted professor Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at the Yale School of Medicine. “While immunity was not enough to block reinfection, it protected the person from disease.”
Dr. Vincent Rajkumar, a professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic, agreed. “Immunity is protecting your own body from having severe disease the second time around,” tweeted Rajkumar. “The immune system is primed and better prepared. That’s immunity.”
www.yahoo.com
Key part from the article:
Although the 33-year-old tested positive for COVID-19 a second time, multiple experts have pointed out that he showed no symptoms — which may be good news. “This is no cause for alarm — this is a textbook example of how immunity should work,” tweeted professor Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at the Yale School of Medicine. “While immunity was not enough to block reinfection, it protected the person from disease.”
Dr. Vincent Rajkumar, a professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic, agreed. “Immunity is protecting your own body from having severe disease the second time around,” tweeted Rajkumar. “The immune system is primed and better prepared. That’s immunity.”
COVID-19 reinfection case 'no cause for alarm,' experts say
As researchers from the University of Hong Kong report the first case of COVID-19 reinfection, here are three reasons you shouldn't panic.
A little surprised that this hasn't popped up today as it seems like bad news but could actually be positive if the 'reinfection' is found to come with no symptoms/effects. What I'd like to know is how contagious someone is if this happens.
Key part from the article:
Although the 33-year-old tested positive for COVID-19 a second time, multiple experts have pointed out that he showed no symptoms — which may be good news. “This is no cause for alarm — this is a textbook example of how immunity should work,” tweeted professor Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at the Yale School of Medicine. “While immunity was not enough to block reinfection, it protected the person from disease.”
Dr. Vincent Rajkumar, a professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic, agreed. “Immunity is protecting your own body from having severe disease the second time around,” tweeted Rajkumar. “The immune system is primed and better prepared. That’s immunity.”
COVID-19 reinfection case 'no cause for alarm,' experts say
As researchers from the University of Hong Kong report the first case of COVID-19 reinfection, here are three reasons you shouldn't panic.
I've thought all along that Covid-19 more or less becomes a common cold once everyone is "primed" for it. Hopefully that proves to the case.
I heard many doctors and virus expert say this back in February/March. It's likely the other coronaviruses and infuenza viruses were pretty potent their first time through the population as well.
- Status
