Posted on 12/27/2020 5:31:34 PM PST by SeekAndFind
1. This study was done POST-LOCKDOWN. They had already wiped out Covid in Wuhan.
2. It says right in the abstract that out of the 10 million people, they found NO NEW SYMPTOMATIC CASES at all.
3. If there were zero symptomatic cases in 10 million, people then it is not surprising they couldn't find any symptomatic contacts among the few asymptomatic cases that turned up.
5. There could have been lots of asymptomatic spreaders in Wuhan prior to the end of the lockdown. They would not have been identified by this study.
6. This study does not tell you anything about the contagiousness of the vastly larger number of asymptomatic people in a country where there is un-contained spread such as our own.
“Where did the “6 foot rule” come from? Can’t possibly be scientific.”
Actually it came from the 1918 Influenza outbreak, as they didn’t have much to go on.
Since then the CDC has been too busy searching for microbes hiding inside gun barrels (to prove guns are an ‘epidemic’) to bother with trivial concerns like trying to preventing nation-crippling pandemics.
When your goal is to cripple a nation, prevention ceases to be a priority.
p
To be complete...this study is also coming out of:
Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
The bottom line on this study, there was a 0.0% new covid positive tests resulting from "close contact" with people who were covid positive but not showing symptoms (asymptomatic).
Put another way...out of nearly 10 million people, only 300 were new covid positive but not showing signs of it and 1,174 people who were close to those covid asymptomatic's, nobody new got infected. Nobody.
This is evidence that the orthodoxy here in the U.S. and most of Europe that lockdown's, cloth mask wearing, "social distance" mandates and selective business closures are not based on "settled science" along the lines of the man caused globul warming scam...but rather, based on liberal politicians desire for power and control.
The take away is this...
If individual people (esp those with compromised immune systems & the very old) feel the personal need to put a cloth mask over their mouth or nose, then that is their individual right.
But governments, whether state or local (or soon federal) should NOT be in the business of mandating any such thing and should NOT be selectively closing down some businesses, while allowing others to remain open.
False. This study was done post-lockdown and claims relevance only in that context: "The citywide screening of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan is a mass screening programme in post-lockdown settings, and provided invaluable experiences or lessons with international relevance as more countries and cities around the world entering the post-lockdown phase."
A study done in China? No thanks
I quoted directly from the study.
Or is it the lockdowns and cloth masks that you think are legitimate?
+1
[Where did the “6 foot rule” come from?
Can’t possibly be scientific.]
Right. Scientific would be in meters. /s
“What part of what I stated was false?”
The part I quoted. The study is not evidence of what you claim - for the reason I explained.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.