Jump to content

Menu

Asymptomatic COVID-19 patients aren’t spreading virus


BookwormTo2
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, TracyP said:

I'm not sure if cases are being classified the same in every state. In my state this would count as a covid death. Also in my state, if someone in a nursing home is dying and they contract covid, their death will be classified as a covid death. The health department claims that this distinction between dying *with covid* versus dying *from covid* is not important right now. They are just trying to be consistent.

 

My state is still not up to speed on testing.  

So mostly deaths not attributed to CV19 unless person was in hospital, because still not much testing done for it.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pen said:

 

 

What do you mean by increasing lethality rate?

 

afaik the virus is not either more nor less lethal than it was 

There seems to have been a decrease in deaths per day from the highest they were trailing about a month after lock down measures. 

 

Many of us think it will go up again as we “open up”— but maybe not to as high a level as it was in mid April. (Because maybe we have learned some things to help, and maybe more people will still be careful, and more outdoors for summer, and so on.)

that’s not how lethal the virus is, just deaths total and thus death rate per population 

06073B8F-C6B9-43F1-B214-F14281EB4BE4.png

Sorry, I meant death rate, as in , what percentage of people are dying from it per day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ktgrok it goes up and down so 3 day average is probably more helpful than day report, but USA is already over 1,000 deaths today which is up from last week when I looked.

(and over 10 times typical daily deaths from automobile fatalities ) 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DoraBora said:

That is interesting.  I wonder when it will become important.

Seems a bit slapdash.

 

I don’t know quite what they mean by ‘with Covid’  but if Covid is significantly impacting their health at the time than I think it makes sense. From my limited experience those patients who were the ones with a serious case of Covid were seriously ill and If they die they may very well not have if they hadn’t had the Covid symptoms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

And worse than just about every other country in the world

 

Protests, rallies, gambling casinos, pool parties, car racing, mega churches gatherings, ...

🤷‍♀️

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Economist reported that large numbers of people who died *with* Covid died *of* it, and would have gone on to live for years. For example: "Most victims in their 60s and 70s could have lived for more than ten years."  The graphic is here https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/05/02/would-most-covid-19-victims-have-died-soon-without-the-virus

but the article requires subscription.

I'm glad WHO has walked it back and would agree that it would be good to amend the thread title.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/9/2020 at 8:11 PM, Pen said:

 

Protests, rallies, gambling casinos, pool parties, car racing, mega churches gatherings, ...

🤷‍♀️

 

Government representatives who make false statements (like my county health department, which claimed that they didn't need to do contact tracing on their index case before he developed symptoms, known to me as a layperson to be inaccurate the day they said it)

People with one or more untreated or under-treated health conditions because of the bankruptcy-inducing cost of health care

People who don't know better than to drink bleach (?!?) and generally seem to not know basics of human health and safety (see also: vaccine issues)

People who are overweight and undernourished

People who are inclined to believe news/entertainment reports and social media posts without considering the extent to which they are inflammatory and/or inaccurate

People who refuse to wear face masks...

It's a long list.

Edited by Carolina Wren
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

Well, the distinction between dying "of" something vs "with" something has actually always been a matter of doc opinion.  When people die with multiple conditions, it's especially difficult to figure out.  If someone who is obese, with a positive flu test ends up having a heart attack at home after starting tamiflu....is that a heart attack, complications of the flu, complications of obesity, or a severe reaction to tamiflu?  Or...all of the above?

 

The doctor usually says what the primary cause of death is and then lists contributing factors. So it would probably be listed as a MI and the primary reason (the immediate thing that killed the person), with contributing factors of influenza, obesity, and drug side effects.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

My experience tells me that this is going to be VERY dependent on the quality of the doc (and probably where he's practicing.)  Sometimes a doc is thoughtful and really looks into what is going on.  And sometimes a doc is all "she was 63, she had the flu, good enough."   

I question that, though, because there are protocols at hospitals and for medical examiners. Now - it’s possible I’m just so biased towards thinking quality of medical care is excellent, because I live where that is true much more often than not. But it’s hard for me to imagine a medical examiner who will do a half-assed, sloppy job on the reg. Especially when there is a pandemic, because it seems to me that a pandemic is...well, an exciting opportunity for people who have made illness and disease their life’s work. Kind of like how meteorologists get excited about predicting hurricanes. I would expect the preponderance would be towards wanting accurate stats. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Quill said:

I question that, though, because there are protocols at hospitals and for medical examiners. Now - it’s possible I’m just so biased towards thinking quality of medical care is excellent, because I live where that is true much more often than not. But it’s hard for me to imagine a medical examiner who will do a half-assed, sloppy job on the reg. Especially when there is a pandemic, because it seems to me that a pandemic is...well, an exciting opportunity for people who have made illness and disease their life’s work. Kind of like how meteorologists get excited about predicting hurricanes. I would expect the preponderance would be towards wanting accurate stats. 

Since there is a whistleblower complaint against the medical examiner in the county just south of us, that isn't always true. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Pen said:

@Ktgrok it goes up and down so 3 day average is probably more helpful than day report, but USA is already over 1,000 deaths today which is up from last week when I looked.

(and over 10 times typical daily deaths from automobile fatalities ) 

No, I mean that in my state, for our state dashboard, it can take weeks for the stats to be anywhere near accurate. but they report them right away anyway. So, for example, if you look at the dashboard on 5/9, you will see 5 deaths listed on 5/8. But if I look at the dashboard today, there are 15 deaths on 5/8. And if I look tomorrow, there will be more. They go back and retroactively fill in the date based on date of death, not date the data was reported. So that means that the little graph ALWAYS looks like deaths are on a downward trend, because they haven't finished putting in the data for the recent dates, and they are still adding to the older ones. A 3 day average wouldn't help, would be the same thing, because the past 3 days are not accurate yet. Will take weeks for them to be retroactively filled in with the deaths that happened that day. So basically, the graph is unfinished, but they publish it as if it is. I just started tracking, so can't say how long they take to keep adding deaths to past dates, but just at a glance it seems weeks. And the CDC says it takes 2-8 weeks to get death certificates in some cases. My state says it is updating the past two weeks at any time, but I'd imagine it is longer back than that. 

So only if you are looking at dates from more than 2 months ago are you seeing anywhere near accurate data. Again, at least in my state. I have no idea what others are doing. (and I'm paying more attention to the state stats than the country as a whole). This is what the graph looks like right now, for Florida. You can see how misleading that graph is, if you just look at it, and don't read the tiny disclaimer at the bottom, that you have to scroll through a tiny box to make appear. Their disclaimer (not in the screen shot) says, "Death data often has significant delays in reporting, so data within the past two weeks will be updated frequently." 

 

Screen Shot 2020-06-10 at 3.25.12 PM.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ktgrok I have been using the graphs from this website to help me. They have seven day trend lines for cases, hospitalizations and deaths. You can see how some of the numbers fall off on the weekends due to reporting delays.  I am REALLY concerned about how the cases are trending.   

https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/06/07/two-charts-show-positive-trends-for-florida-in-coronavirus-battle/

 

CASES6010.jpg

Edited by cintinative
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ktgrok

ok.  I see what u mean.

also though I think if we do see daily deaths for US headed back up, (which seems to be the situation as I have been watching that)  it is that much more significant given likelihood of underreported numbers that will get adjusted upward in weeks to come

 

Possibly of interest, this was an attempt to get fatality rates for NYC as of early May iirc:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
On 6/8/2020 at 7:35 PM, Pen said:

@BookwormTo2   

Adding: I don’t trust WHO, but your title goes beyond what WHO has asserted. 

“Rare” vs “aren’t “: not the same thing

 

I just saw this after not logging in for a while. The title of the article actually originally was what I posted as the title of this thread, and sometime after that the article title was edited/changed by CNBC. I think it's interesting how things have evolved from when we first learned about the pandemic.  https://time.com/5850256/who-asymptomatic-spread/

I still don't understand why some people get COVID-19 really badly while for some they experience few or no symptoms. I saw a college student post in the past week that they got COVID-19 and had no health problems prior, and had to be hospitalized for it. This is scary stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, BookwormTo2 said:

I just saw this after not logging in for a while. The title of the article actually originally was what I posted as the title of this thread, and sometime after that the article title was edited/changed by CNBC. I think it's interesting how things have evolved from when we first learned about the pandemic.  https://time.com/5850256/who-asymptomatic-spread/

Yes. 

That is interesting.

We keep seeing that.

Currently it seems to be belief that children don’t spread the virus which seems to be wrong, but believed by quite a few people. 

I expect if schools open without all sorts of precautions, such as masks for all, physical distance, etc. it will get proved that children do spread the virus. But I guess we will have to learn the hard way. ( I hope to be happily wrong.)

 

23 hours ago, BookwormTo2 said:

 

I still don't understand why some people get COVID-19 really badly while for some they experience few or no symptoms. I saw a college student post in the past week that they got COVID-19 and had no health problems prior, and had to be hospitalized for it. This is scary stuff.

 

This would be really good to know.

 What factors cause severe illnesses?

Especially what factors might there be that we can influence?

One May be the dose of virus, so that masks and distance even though not perfect may help a lot to get a milder case if one gets it at all. Perhaps a very small dose of the virus would give a small illness. 

Vitamin D status and similar may also be factors that play a role and that we can influence.

Other factors that have been suggested as relevant , like perhaps blood type, aren’t in our control. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pen said:

Yes. 

That is interesting.

We keep seeing that.

Currently it seems to be belief that children don’t spread the virus which seems to be wrong, but believed by quite a few people. 

I expect if schools open without all sorts of precautions, such as masks for all, physical distance, etc. it will get proved that children do spread the virus. But I guess we will have to learn the hard way. ( I hope to be happily wrong.)

 

 

This would be really good to know.

 What factors cause severe illnesses?

Especially what factors might there be that we can influence?

One May be the dose of virus, so that masks and distance even though not perfect may help a lot to get a milder case if one gets it at all. Perhaps a very small dose of the virus would give a small illness. 

Vitamin D status and similar may also be factors that play a role and that we can influence.

Other factors that have been suggested as relevant , like perhaps blood type, aren’t in our control. 

 

Yes, I totally agree about reopening schools-- precautions do need to be taken and I'm afraid that it will be a disaster once K-12 opens in our area next month. I would also be glad to be wrong on this.

I am frustrated with what seems to be lack of good information on what scientists have found to be true so far re: COVID-19. I think it is true what many on this forum have read about Vitamin D levels having a great influence on how a person's body reacts to COVID-19 (low Vit. D is not good!). But what about other vitamin levels like B-12 (I've read 40% of people have low B12 levels) and other vitamins humans need where low levels may have an impact on how a person's body deals with COVID-19? I am sure there is a lot of research going on and things scientists may know about COVID-19 that  the general public doesn't know yet.

I think social distancing works pretty well, and of course wearing a mask will help at least with people not touching their faces all the time. However, I am dismayed to see store employees wearing masks in our area and pulling the mask down to the chin level to better talk with fellow employees. 

Also, off topic, but I'm glad that I'm finally getting auto emails from this forum about topics I've asked for notification of replies! Now, about that pesky yellow Help button on the bottom right....will that be going away anytime soon?!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw a meme last week that did the math...  it said that most kids are safe, but 0.5% of children 5-18 die from covid, which means when schools go back in session 65,000 American children will die, mostly high school students.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BookwormTo2 said:

Yes, I totally agree about reopening schools-- precautions do need to be taken and I'm afraid that it will be a disaster once K-12 opens in our area next month. I would also be glad to be wrong on this.

I am frustrated with what seems to be lack of good information on what scientists have found to be true so far re: COVID-19. I think it is true what many on this forum have read about Vitamin D levels having a great influence on how a person's body reacts to COVID-19 (low Vit. D is not good!). But what about other vitamin levels like B-12 (I've read 40% of people have low B12 levels) and other vitamins humans need where low levels may have an impact on how a person's body deals with COVID-19? I am sure there is a lot of research going on and things scientists may know about COVID-19 that  the general public doesn't know yet.

I think it would be a good time to have as many vitamins and other similar nutrients as optimum as we can

i am also taking B complex

and I think Selenium is particularly likely to be of help in re CV19, also vitamins K, A, E, C, , selenium, magnesium, zinc... NAC (for glutathione) ...

nitric oxide ...

Quote

 

I think social distancing works pretty well, and of course wearing a mask will help at least with people not touching their faces all the time. However, I am dismayed to see store employees wearing masks in our area and pulling the mask down to the chin level to better talk with fellow employees. 

 

Or lifting them - yeah, it misses the point.

 

Quote

Also, off topic, but I'm glad that I'm finally getting auto emails from this forum about topics I've asked for notification of replies! Now, about that pesky yellow Help button on the bottom right....will that be going away anytime soon?!

 

I got rid of help button (but it gives navy and green headers instead of the pretty bright blue I had) by ...   how...

scroll way down to bottom and look for “theme”

inside theme there’s a setting like plain or some such without the yellow help

 

”default” in “theme” gets rid of the “help” yellow blob

Edited by Pen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Pen said:

I think it would be a good time to have as many vitamins and other similar nutrients as optimum as we can

i am also taking B complex

and I think Selenium is particularly likely to be of help in re CV19, also vitamins K, A, E, C, , selenium, magnesium, zinc... NAC (for glutathione) ...

nitric oxide ...

 

Or lifting them - yeah, it misses the point.

 

 

I got rid of help button (but it gives navy and green headers instead of the pretty bright blue I had) by ...   how...

scroll way down to bottom and look for “theme”

inside theme there’s a setting like plain or some such without the yellow help

 

”default” in “theme” gets rid of the “help” yellow blob

Thanks so much for helping me get rid of the yellow Help button!!! My eyes really disliked that yellow button.

Agree re: supplements. I'm taking B12 and vitamin C. I've got some of what you mentioned on hand if we need it (NAC, magnesium, K, zinc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Fifiruth said:

The WHO based their comments on findings from the Germans who have been doing very extensive and thorough testing and tracing from the very beginning. Unfortunately, the WHO walked back the scientist’s comments under pressure from ?

The scientist was trying to make the point that the focus should be on those who have symptoms because they are definitely spreading the virus. The U.S. doctors on the task force keep saying that there are “probably” huge numbers of asymptomatic spreaders, hence the masks. 

They don’t seem to have facts, but they are quite sure because the Chinese reports said so.

Sorry, I’m being snarky 🙂

 

It's like the 'airborne' vis 'droplet' argument - medical terminology hair splitting that made many people think that you couldn't get this by breathing it in because it wasn't 'airborne'.  No, that isn't what that means.

The hair-splitting in the WHO comments was between asymptomatic (never get symptoms) and pre-symptomatic (will get symptoms but don't have any yet) - and no one is arguing that pre-symptomatic people don't spread it. They absolutely do. I think virtually every.single.superpsreader has not been symptomatic when they spread it all about.   Those are the most dangerous spreaders - the pre-symptomatic.  Which is technically different than asymptomatic.  But people hear that and think 'if I have don't have symptoms right now, I can't spread it'. NO, that isn't what that means.

Edited by Matryoshka
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I think that even if we decide that only symptomatic people spread, correctly identifying who is symptomatic won't be easy.  

There is literally no way to figure out who is asymptomatic vs pre-symptomatic.  Pre-symptomatic people definitely spread it.  So, for daily cautions like mask use, the difference is completely, utterly irrelevant.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newsflash - 
this is from a VERY trustworthy friend.  Her cousin (and friend) went to be tested, filled out the paperwork, but the line was so long they gave up and left WITHOUT being tested.  Two weeks later, they received their test results in the mail as positive.  They were NEVER TESTED!

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a very sad story in the news last week about a 51 yr old man who died after attending a party that included one person who was infected but asymptomatic. No one was wearing masks. The reason it made national news was because the day before he died he posted a heartfelt plea on FB for other people not to be "an idiot" like him, and said he hoped that with God's help he would survive the disease.

This is why I don't understand people who claim there's no point in wearing a mask or being extra cautious right now because "there aren't many cases in my area." The difference between life and death for this man was literally ONE person with no symptoms. The outbreak in the Oregon church that infected over 200 people, with 2 dead and several more hospitalized, was in a rural county that had previously only had 22 cases in 3 months. I just don't get the idea of "I'll wait until cases are really bad in my area before I bother taking precautions."

  • Like 7
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am looking at the CDC website re: asymptomatic people, and the problem with facts on asymptomatic people is more time and study is needed for facts about if/how much asymptomatic people transmit. As CDC states, asymptomatic people are not routinely tested. From CDC's recently updated site: "The relative infectiousness of asymptomatic cases to symptomatic cases remains highly uncertain as asymptomatic cases are difficult to identify and transmission is difficult to observe and quantify. The estimates for relative infectiousness are assumptions based on studies of viral shedding dynamics."

On a different part of the CDC site, there is a Q&A:

 

When is someone infectious?

The onset and duration of viral shedding and the period of infectiousness for COVID-19 are not yet known. It is possible that SARS-CoV-2 RNA may be detectable in the upper or lower respiratory tract for weeks after illness onset, similar to infections with MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV. However, detection of viral RNA does not necessarily mean that infectious virus is present. There are reports of asymptomatic infections (detection of virus with no development of symptoms) and pre-symptomatic infections (detection of virus prior to development of symptoms) with SARS-CoV-2, but their role in transmission is not yet known. Based on existing literature, the incubation period (the time from exposure to development of symptoms) of SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses (e.g. MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV) ranges from 2–14 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

There was a very sad story in the news last week about a 51 yr old man who died after attending a party that included one person who was infected but asymptomatic. No one was wearing masks. The reason it made national news was because the day before he died he posted a heartfelt plea on FB for other people not to be "an idiot" like him, and said he hoped that with God's help he would survive the disease.

This is why I don't understand people who claim there's no point in wearing a mask or being extra cautious right now because "there aren't many cases in my area." The difference between life and death for this man was literally ONE person with no symptoms. The outbreak in the Oregon church that infected over 200 people, with 2 dead and several more hospitalized, was in a rural county that had previously only had 22 cases in 3 months. I just don't get the idea of "I'll wait until cases are really bad in my area before I bother taking precautions."

We had that here back in march - before everything really blew up.  one *asymptomatic* person attended a choir practice.  masks were not required (and rarely thought of - this was march)- they "social distanced".  86% of attendees got sick, two died.

 

re: the bolded.  "I'll fix the barn door after the horse escapes."

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

Newsflash - 
this is from a VERY trustworthy friend.  Her cousin (and friend) went to be tested, filled out the paperwork, but the line was so long they gave up and left WITHOUT being tested.  Two weeks later, they received their test results in the mail as positive.  They were NEVER TESTED!

 

I have heard this story repeated on FB.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

We had that here back in march - before everything really blew up.  one *asymptomatic* person attended a choir practice.  masks were not required (and rarely thought of - this was march)- they "social distanced".  86% of attendees got sick, two died.

 

re: the bolded.  "I'll fix the barn door after the horse escapes."

Well, after the CDC investigated, it looks like from their report that one person who had cold-like symptoms attended the choir you're talking about in Skagit County, WA on March 7 and seems like that person was the super spreader. So, not an asymptomatic person. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BookwormTo2 said:

Well, after the CDC investigated, it looks like from their report that one person who had cold-like symptoms attended the choir you're talking about in Skagit County, WA on March 7 and seems like that person was the super spreader. So, not an asymptomatic person. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm

Clarification:  "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice. One person at the March 10 practice had cold-like symptoms beginning March 7. This person, who had also attended the March 3 practice, had a positive laboratory result for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing."

So, the person who had symptoms did not have them when he/she attended the March 3rd practice. Some people who attended the March 3rd practice only got sick.  So presumably the person was pre-symptomatic on March 3rd. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Corraleno said:

This is why I don't understand people who claim there's no point in wearing a mask or being extra cautious right now because "there aren't many cases in my area." The difference between life and death for this man was literally ONE person with no symptoms. The outbreak in the Oregon church that infected over 200 people, with 2 dead and several more hospitalized, was in a rural county that had previously only had 22 cases in 3 months. I just don't get the idea of "I'll wait until cases are really bad in my area before I bother taking precautions."

Thank you. I'm going to bring this up at my "should kids and staff wear masks at school" meeting tomorrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cintinative said:

 

I have heard this story repeated on FB.  

My friend had a direct zoom chat with her cousin that had this happen to her  - this isn't some a friend of a friend of a friend FB post.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cintinative said:

Clarification:  "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice. One person at the March 10 practice had cold-like symptoms beginning March 7. This person, who had also attended the March 3 practice, had a positive laboratory result for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing."

So, the person who had symptoms did not have them when he/she attended the March 3rd practice. Some people who attended the March 3rd practice only got sick.  So presumably the person was pre-symptomatic on March 3rd. 

Oops -- What I meant to put after reading that whole long CDC article is the super spreader reported cold-like symptoms starting March 7. Three days later that person attended the choir practice on March 10 and didn't realize he/she had COVID-19. No choir member was sick on March 3. CDC concluded the person who had cold-like symptoms starting on March 7 was the index patient. Possibly that person was pre-symptomatic on March 3, but the CDC report doesn't say (that I could find, could be wrong!). From what I can tell reading the CDC report (under Investigation and Findings subhead) and the discussion about odds, the March 10 choir practice was the super spreader event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

My friend had a direct zoom chat with her cousin that had this happen to her  - this isn't some a friend of a friend of a friend FB post.

One of my mom's friends said this same thing happened to her about going for a COVID-19 test and leaving and not getting tested because the line was too long...and then getting told her test came back positive. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, BookwormTo2 said:

One of my mom's friends said this same thing happened to her about going for a COVID-19 test and leaving and not getting tested because the line was too long...and then getting told her test came back positive. 

This now begs the questions - is there some directive that if someone leaves they're automatically listed as positive?   How many people leave because the lines are too long and they don't want to wait anymore?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

My friend had a direct zoom chat with her cousin that had this happen to her  - this isn't some a friend of a friend of a friend FB post.

 

55 minutes ago, BookwormTo2 said:

One of my mom's friends said this same thing happened to her about going for a COVID-19 test and leaving and not getting tested because the line was too long...and then getting told her test came back positive. 

So what did they do? They must have had a reason for going in for a test. Did they go ahead and quarantine or did they assume they didn't have covid? Was this discrepancy picked up by contact tracers or did this happen in areas without contact tracing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

This now begs the questions - is there some directive that if someone leaves they're automatically listed as positive?   How many people leave because the lines are too long and they don't want to wait anymore?

 

I am wondering this also. When I saw it on FB, people were using it to downplay the positive numbers, and I really wondered at the veracity of it. I wonder if you are right and there is some sort of directive for this

 

Edited by cintinative
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

This now begs the questions - is there some directive that if someone leaves they're automatically listed as positive?   How many people leave because the lines are too long and they don't want to wait anymore?

That's just not likely, at all. 

if it was, we'd have even MORE positives here. And most of our positives are from private labs, not the public free ones wiht the super long lines. It would be the opposite if that was true. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And not to be mean, but I'm going to point out that both instances being cited are still twice removed - the friend of my mom, or the friend of my cousin. Unless you KNOW the person saying this, and they are saying directly to you, with proof, I would be very hesitant to take this on blind faith. Having friends who work in labs, etc...this just isn't a thing. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

And not to be mean, but I'm going to point out that both instances being cited are still twice removed - the friend of my mom, or the friend of my cousin. Unless you KNOW the person saying this, and they are saying directly to you, with proof, I would be very hesitant to take this on blind faith. Having friends who work in labs, etc...this just isn't a thing. 

It’s a story I’ve seen repeated often recently across social media which is why I’m suspicious of it being true.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

My friend had a direct zoom chat with her cousin that had this happen to her  - this isn't some a friend of a friend of a friend FB post.

 

If not a made up story, I wonder if it was a fake test site?

https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2020/fake-coronavirus-testing-sites.html

where because fake in first place they didn’t notice that there was no swab

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pen said:

 

If not a made up story, I wonder if it was a fake test site?

https://www.aarp.org/money/scams-fraud/info-2020/fake-coronavirus-testing-sites.html

where because fake in first place they didn’t notice that there was no swab

 

 

not - it was a real site, just taking too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...