The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(08-19-2020 08:17 AM)ODUCoach Wrote:  

(08-19-2020 08:12 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(08-18-2020 06:32 PM)ODUCoach Wrote:  In this study in Annals of Internal Medicine, from contact tracing in Hubei, asymptomatic cases led to infection in only 1/305 people.

The rest is more or less as we already know: the more severe the symptoms, the more likely you are to spread. The more frequent the contact, the more likely you are to spread.

The public mask mandates rely on a whole host of assumptions being true, none of which have proven to be very strong under scrutiny. I don’t think it’s fair to say they’ve been absolutely disproven, but I don’t think the case is nearly as strong as the virtue signalers make it out to be.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-2671

Similar studies have shown this but there's a distinction between asymptomatic and presymptomatic, the latter being able to cause transmission much easier.

Right. But, then what we're saying to justify mask mandates (and other restrictions) is that we must treat everyone as if they were not asymptomatic, but presymptomatic. That seems like an awfully big assumption.

Huh? We know that assumption is wrong regardless. 90%+ of the people anywhere you go are likely not infected at all. Some might be asymptomatic with a slighter chance of being infectious and some could be presymptomatic super spreaders. We don't know who's who though so we assume everyone has it and is capable of spreading it.