COVID Research of the Day

A huge study out of China demonstrating, for the umpteenth time, that there is no such thing as an asymptomatic spread of COVID. This has been known for months but the value of the study is it’s enormous volume.

Lack of asymptomatic transmission is one of the reasons why masks are completely useless.

The study also demonstrates that “cases” are a useless metric.

Before anybody starts on the “but it’s China” tangent, we have known this for months because every study from everywhere has come up with the same conclusions.

9 thoughts on “COVID Research of the Day”

    1. This canard has been making the rounds for months. Those studies have nothing to do with SARS-COV-2. Most of them are downright bizarre, like a study of obese Korean teenagers from a decade ago. Many have to do with hospital settings, completely different illnesses, it’s just weird. I wonder why there’s nothing on carnival masks, for that matter.

      The first time I saw this link was months ago. Since then, a lot of research has been done on SARS-COV-2. But people are still reposting this ancient link. It’s useless to argue with them because their theory is unfalsifiable. Nothing will ever prove them wrong because they know nothing will ever prove them wrong. It goes in circles.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I noted some of the studies were weird. Thank you. I am reading through the study you shared and plan to share it with my church. They said I am not allowed to attend without a mask. I went twice without one and was yelled at last Sunday by a man (who I guess no longer likes me). I hadn’t been to church since March. I wanted to illustrate to people that we should stand up for our rights and learn the truth and share the truth and—somehow by courage—retain our freedoms. The pastor called to tell me I am no longer welcome at my church “without a mask”. I’m still trying to process that. I’m not sick. Well, that’s not true. I’m sick at heart.


    2. “how we even begin to respond to that”

      The US is a big country and thinking in national terms about this is not…. useful. Look at the local data. Whatever else it is or isn’t, covid behaves locally like a typical seasonal respiratory virus with the same curve of 6 to 8 week increase then stall and decline…

      It also seems, when all is said and done to have one big wave and then maybe some smaller waves (more casedemics than pandemics). Italy might be a counter example but the first wave there was concentrated in a small region and maybe the other regions are having their waves now…. the ‘first wave’ in Poland (where I am) probably wasn’t a wave at all and it’s going through it’s big wave is cresting now.

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Respectfully, the statement “there is no such thing as an asymptomatic spread of COVID” is false. The following is a previously shared link showing a woman who was asymptomatic and shedding infectious particles for a long time:

    Further, I would not only discount the value of that study but outright throw the whole thing into the nearest bin as being absolute garbage. The data out of China can’t be called data at all. It’s trash, and obviously so.

    For instance, during the study period, which they say they conducted between May 14 and 1 June, the whole country of nearly one and a half billion people, that to my direct knowledge from people on site had burned at least – at least – 50,000 people by April was telling the world, day after day, that they were recording less than a dozen cases per day, every day, for the whole period. Some days, they were saying that they only had 2 cases.

    Fifty thousand dead a month earlier means many times that number infected, incubating, and breaking out in an illness that very commonly lasts for weeks, which in turn means very significant background infection throughout the population. Very significant background infection means very significant new infections, and can not – can not – result in less than a dozen infections per day, every day, for weeks straight.

    It doesn’t make sense to think that so-called medical scientists who wont even publish how many people are infected at all are all of a sudden going to publish how people are being infected. No way.


    1. If we could tell the difference between the two, then the difference would be the symptom, which would then extinguish the condition of being presymptomatic. So the only way to differentiate would be to observe the patient until convalescence.

      In other words, we watch until either a symptom shows, or the virus is no more.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.