Some governments and media seem intent on terrorizing people into submission by posting the latest updates on the number of new COVID cases. But deliberate or not, what is missing in those numbers is some very important data, like how many who tested positive are asymptomatic? This means they tested positive for COVID, but did not get sick.
Why is this important? Because virologists are telling us, that the chances of an asymptomatic person spreading the virus are very low. WHO described it as “very rare.”
But reporting the often significant numbers of asymptomatic cases would dilute those high counts used to justify more extreme COVID-1984 lockdowns.
The Blaze explains:
Beginning in May, the Chinese government conducted the largest mass testing for COVID-19 of anywhere on the globe. Out of 10 million people tested in Wuhan, just 300 were positive and were all asymptomatic. None of them spread it to their contacts. That is zero out of 1,174 contacts. According to the study, published in Nature Communications, none of those who tested positive produced live virus in the cultures. This explains very easily why none of them seemed to infect others. […]
Dr. Fauci himself, before this became political and a tool for control, stated very emphatically that “the driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person.” “Even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks,” said Fauci in a January 28 press conference.
The World Health Organization said in May that asymptomatic spread was “very rare.” Then, like any time a major scientific figure reveals the truth, the WHO suddenly recanted that position when the media raised a howl.
A U.S.-based study from the University of Florida, Gainesville, Department of Biostatistics, observed similar low rates of transmission among the asymptomatic. Researchers found symptomatic individuals transmitted the virus at rates 28 times higher than asymptomatic individuals. Another Chinese study from May found very weak transmission capability among asymptomatic infections.
This is exactly the point, that two British virologists, Dr. Tom Jefferson and Professor Carl Heneghan, made in an editorial they wrote for the Daily Mail when they questioned the government’s use of lockdowns.
The government and media in that country are pushing those increasing COVID numbers and warning that upwards of 4,000 people could be dying each day by Christmas.
But Jefferson and Heneghan explain:
Huge resources have been poured into the roll-out of mass swab tests provided by the NHS. In theory, they should tell us who is infectious, how far the virus is spreading and how fast. In practice, the regime is somewhat aimless and indiscriminate. It has wasted precious resources.
In part, this is because the results identify large numbers of ‘positive’ cases among people who are not infectious. In some cases, the swab tests are picking up levels of Covid-19 which are so very low that the patient will not pass the virus on.
This makes a ‘positive’ reading difficult to interpret. In other cases, administrative errors creep in, as is only too likely given the volume of testing. But the bigger problem is this: the tests give us a simple yes/no answer but fail to identify those who pose a genuine risk.
The results make no distinction between an eight-year-old who is less likely to transmit the virus and a 75-year-old who could prove highly infectious and is in personal danger, especially if suffering multiple health problems.