CDC no longer recommends asymptomatic testing
- Thread starter Ldgator
- Start date
Wont that bing the positivity rate up if they stopped testing healthy people? They increase the denominator without raising the numerator.
A
anon_i8nzeu2gbf0ba
Guest
Asymptomatic doesn't mean healthy. Asymptomatic means you might have the virus, but without testing, you'll never know for sure . . . unless you eventually do show symptoms.
It's complicated. Ask the prez. He'll explain it.
It's complicated. Ask the prez. He'll explain it.
Does this mean asymptomatic spread is unlikely, or that asymptomatic cases are less common than first thought?
Also the line between asymptomatic and mild symptoms can be blurry. People get headaches for non-covid reasons, how do you know this headache is a Covid headache?
Also the line between asymptomatic and mild symptoms can be blurry. People get headaches for non-covid reasons, how do you know this headache is a Covid headache?
The CDC will tell you 6 months from now what this means.
Seems that way. If all these new cases are from jerks heading out when they have a cough shame on them.
We're all thinking of this as great news personally and for athletics, but really this is a great thing for trying to control this virus. If we don't need to spend resources on asymptomatic contacts maybe we can figure out why this is spreading so easily.
Has another human being ever shown you love?
Honestly after stepping back...I'm not buying asymptomatic at all. I personally believe this was their reason to further freak everyone out into wearing a mask/ face shield. You do realize you can get viruses thru your eyes right..how in the heck do you think you get pink eye????
I also don't think we will look back at this next year and laugh. We will either be in the same boat, or we will have a little thing called justification. People WILL be wanting to prove their friend/ family member didn't die in vain and try to keep pushing.
I also don't think we will look back at this next year and laugh. We will either be in the same boat, or we will have a little thing called justification. People WILL be wanting to prove their friend/ family member didn't die in vain and try to keep pushing.
I am not the Prez but I will help you.
What do you call a person who is asymptomatic and tests positive for COVID 19? HEALTHY!!!
If they wont let you be treated I totally agree. Waste of time and money. Masks, lock downs, and a crooked B10 commissioner do diddly but prolong immunity acquisition. Day 15 to flatten the curve head heading onto day 191 to flatten the economy and Trump. Won't work. 4. More.✌️
Masks aren't for your own protection. They're to keep you from spreading it to anyone else.
Notice how it says you should adhere to mitigation protocols? That means staying home 14 days following the exposure.
The stats vary but the latest number i read was 75% of asymptomatic patients are felt to be contagious.
Growing up with aspirations to be in the health field, CDC’s words might as well be God’s words but over the past 5 months, I’ve found my own judgement to be much more reliable. This one doesn’t pass the smell test to me. But if it does, then yes, it means let’s play ball!
This is a false headline.
Did anyone actually read what the CDC recommends?
The reason they don't recommend testing for an asymptomatic exposure is because:
"A negative test does not mean you will not develop an infection from the close contact or contract an infection at a later time."
The CDC recommends to monitor for symptoms for 14 days after exposure. If you develop symptoms then get tested.
It's a very simple rationale for this, there is a period of time that it takes for the viral load to replicate in the body so that it is detectable on the test. So if you were exposed on day 0, you get a test on day 5 that comes back negative, but then you develop symptoms on day 9 post exposure. This means the person is considered infectious on day 7, but they are walking around thinking they are covid free because they had a negative test on day 5.
Basically this boils down to people are stupid and can't even understand the guidelines of the CDC, so they definitely won't understand how a test could come back negative yet they still need to quarantine.
I’m sure the CDC is normally a fine organization, but the last 5 months they’ve had some head scratchers. Making rapid determinations with probabilistic thinking doesn’t appear to be their strong suit.
In the end, what it means is exactly what the headline says post exposure a symptomatic people do not require testing. Such a person can wait fourteen days and if still a symptomatic there is no reason to test them. They aren't sick.
Its also the CDC's bureaucrats' first step in walking back their universally wrong and greatly exaggerated statistical risks of Covid.
Think about this, the 14 day incubation period is at the long end of the "normal" range. Obviously 2 day is short end. The median, unsurprisingly is around 8 days. But there have been 17 generations of spread based on a 14 day incubation period. Seventeen generations. If the the disease was as contagious as the CDC and other public health bureaucrats said in March and April, we should have had at least 20-30 million cases, based on their more conservative r/naught projections, but its actually only 5.81 million.
Getting much more data that shows a symptomatic positives may not actually spread the virons or the virons they spread are so weak they cannot adhere to a new host.
People that are angry over not B!G football are going to be in full throated rage in a month.
No it means what he said not the reach of math you came up with. Knowing who has the virus or has had the virus is key to understanding it. The piss poor holes substandard testing has provided as data points are more to blame on evolving recommendations vs the CDC not being experts. Their modeling is based on stopping a virus in it's tracks not modulating an effective infection rate.
Your generation formulae is wrong because virus spread is on an individual level and not like a bacteria multiplying in a Petri dish. So every effort to stop virus spread such as remote work environments, hand washing, face masks, not interacting at moderate to large gatherings etc have a positive (in the populace) favor of it not spreading at it's theoretical maximum. So many people want to apply math they understand to problems they don't understand with this virus.
Using a bad formula with correct math means you didn't get the correct answer to the question you are trying to answer.
Forgive yourself because you don't understand Health.
Maybe you need to take a health class again. I took 4 years of undergrad classes and 5 years of medical school classes. How about you?
It means asymptomatic spread is unlikely. Even Fauci the Great said this way back in January:
"“Even if there is some asymptotic transmission, in all the history of respiratory born viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks.”
A headache is not asymptomatic. The way you know if it is a COVID headache is by getting a COVID test.
Last edited:
Appears significant outbreak in Iowa City / Johnson County. Docs at U of I Hospital tweeting about it. I see ISU students were also warned they would get the boot if not following the rules after large parties in Ames last weekend. Kids and rules, will they ever learn.
Sure, anything to keep the pressure on. Just think if everybody around a positive flu test were tested, what do you think those numbers would be?
