4 ms·
Truly asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection. There are been some major public relations problems when an organization said this, and were mista
by AlanSE 6y ago
Truly asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection. There are been some major public relations problems when an organization said this, and were mistaken to mean pre-symptomatic, but the science is pretty clear.
We used to think true asymptomatic infections (never develop any symptoms but test positive) were ~50% of those infected. More recent research puts it at closer to ~20%. Again, some reporting bungled this by reporting studies from controlled populations (like a cruise ship) before they knew if cases were asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic, causing people to quote the number as the former, when it was really a mix.
COVID spreads like wildfire by pre-symptomatic people. There are mountains of evidence to support this. Spread by asymptomatic people is speculation.
> Of course, whether you go on to develop symptoms or not, its still highly pertinent information if asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection.
Not sure, but I think you may be using the word "asymptomatic" to denote pre-symptomatic in this sentence.
> As long as you self isolate upon symptom onset that should be enough.
It is not enough.
- alistaira 6y agoIf a person has no symptoms, I think it is reasonable to say they are "asymptomatic". There is absolutely a difference between 'yet to have' and 'never will have' but I think it is potentially confusing to attempt to delineate between asymptomatic and "pre-symptomatic". The main concern with messaging that causes confusion in this regard is that a superficial reading of "asymptomatic doesn't spread virus" would imply that if you aren't symptomatic, you aren't a danger.