4 ms·

The article's main complaint seems to be that people were slow to accept that it could be transmitted by asymptomatic people through the air, but I don't recall

The article's main complaint seems to be that people were slow to accept that it could be transmitted by asymptomatic people through the air, but I don't recall anyone questioning that, even from the start.

Fomite 6y ago
The author is eliding the debate as to whether transmission was aerosol vs. droplet (which was controversial and difficult to settle) with "did it get passed via the air", which was not. I will say the lack of fomite transmission remains surprising, and one of the few ways we have been fortunate this pandemic. There was very little debate about asymptomatic transmission. But there's a great deal of difference between "Are there asymptomatic carriers?" and "How many, and how efficiently do they transmit?"
- henrikschroder 6y ago
  > But there's a great deal of difference between "Are there asymptomatic carriers?" and "How many, and how efficiently do they transmit?" The greatest tragedy in all of this is that the state of scientific journalism is as crap as it's always been. Science does not deliver neat yes/no answers, it delivers probabilities. Can asymptomatic people spread the virus? Yes. Can you get infected by passing a random unmasked stranger on the street? Yes. Can you get infected by touching a surface that an infected person has touched? Yes. Can you get the disease more than once? Yes. Can you die from the disease? Yes. Can you develop "long covid" after having the disease? Yes. Can you get infected even though you've been fully vaccinated? Yes. Can you die from the vaccine? Yes. The above statements are all true. But their probabilities of happening to you range from very unlikely to microscopic. And that gets completely lost when media reports on it, and when people talk to each other, and when politicians make policies trying to stop the activities that people are most afraid of... And now we're in this mess where it's practically impossible for anyone to know what the right thing to do is.

Fomite 6y ago

The author is eliding the debate as to whether transmission was aerosol vs. droplet (which was controversial and difficult to settle) with "did it get passed via the air", which was not. I will say the lack of fomite transmission remains surprising, and one of the few ways we have been fortunate this pandemic. There was very little debate about asymptomatic transmission. But there's a great deal of difference between "Are there asymptomatic carriers?" and "How many, and how efficiently do they transmit?"

henrikschroder 6y ago
> But there's a great deal of difference between "Are there asymptomatic carriers?" and "How many, and how efficiently do they transmit?" The greatest tragedy in all of this is that the state of scientific journalism is as crap as it's always been. Science does not deliver neat yes/no answers, it delivers probabilities. Can asymptomatic people spread the virus? Yes. Can you get infected by passing a random unmasked stranger on the street? Yes. Can you get infected by touching a surface that an infected person has touched? Yes. Can you get the disease more than once? Yes. Can you die from the disease? Yes. Can you develop "long covid" after having the disease? Yes. Can you get infected even though you've been fully vaccinated? Yes. Can you die from the vaccine? Yes. The above statements are all true. But their probabilities of happening to you range from very unlikely to microscopic. And that gets completely lost when media reports on it, and when people talk to each other, and when politicians make policies trying to stop the activities that people are most afraid of... And now we're in this mess where it's practically impossible for anyone to know what the right thing to do is.