3 ms·

What I find interesting is that many are asymptomatic. If this is true, and means that the disease does not cause meaningful harm, should we be worried? Is this

What I find interesting is that many are asymptomatic. If this is true, and means that the disease does not cause meaningful harm, should we be worried? Is this going to be in reality more like a 24 hour bug?

nkozyra 6y ago
I think at this point it's generally accepted that - for the most part - there is a radically different response from younger healthy people versus immunocompromised people. That's not 100% true, but close. For many people it's true that this would be effectively a bad cold. But two things: 1) they will infect others, and 2) there are a lot of outstanding questions about long term effects of short term disease.
xiphias2 6y ago
For young people going through the disease asymptotically and having anti-bodies is like winning the lottery: they can socialize freely and stop worrying about infecting their family with the virus. So unless the age of hospitalization goes down, it's a good sign.
- pintxo 6y ago
  This is if you get long lasting antibodies from an asymptomatic case, which seems to be unclear. This seems to be early researcher needing more confirmation, but see for example here: https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-antibodies-lost-10-wuhan-study-patients-within-21-days-1511850 https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-antibodies-lost-10-wuha...
tilt_error 6y ago
Asymptomatic yes, but still spreading the virus. The fact that some are asymptomatic only worsens the case of COVID-19 because they will not know to stay home. Those that get sick, which could be your parents, seems to become very sick and in demand of prolonged care. There are clear indications that brain injuries is part of that picture. Without health insurance, you are in really big trouble, and possibly stripped of the after care with possibly long term effects. In what way is it “good” that you have a large population of silent spreaders? You should be very worried.

nkozyra 6y ago

I think at this point it's generally accepted that - for the most part - there is a radically different response from younger healthy people versus immunocompromised people. That's not 100% true, but close. For many people it's true that this would be effectively a bad cold. But two things: 1) they will infect others, and 2) there are a lot of outstanding questions about long term effects of short term disease.

xiphias2 6y ago

For young people going through the disease asymptotically and having anti-bodies is like winning the lottery: they can socialize freely and stop worrying about infecting their family with the virus. So unless the age of hospitalization goes down, it's a good sign.

pintxo 6y ago
This is if you get long lasting antibodies from an asymptomatic case, which seems to be unclear. This seems to be early researcher needing more confirmation, but see for example here: https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-antibodies-lost-10-wuhan-study-patients-within-21-days-1511850 https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-antibodies-lost-10-wuha...

tilt_error 6y ago

Asymptomatic yes, but still spreading the virus. The fact that some are asymptomatic only worsens the case of COVID-19 because they will not know to stay home. Those that get sick, which could be your parents, seems to become very sick and in demand of prolonged care. There are clear indications that brain injuries is part of that picture. Without health insurance, you are in really big trouble, and possibly stripped of the after care with possibly long term effects. In what way is it “good” that you have a large population of silent spreaders? You should be very worried.