A new study of 10 million people was conducted in Wuhan, China the COVID-19 epicenter.
Asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 didn’t occur at all, study of 10 million finds | LifeSite News
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.
ANALYSIS
WUHAN, China, December 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews)
– A study of almost 10 million people in Wuhan, China, found that
asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 did not occur at all, thus undermining
the need for lockdowns, which are built on the premise of the virus
being unwittingly spread by infectious, asymptomatic people.
Published in November in the scientific journal Nature Communications, the paper
was compiled by 19 scientists, mainly from the Huazhong University of
Science and Technology in Wuhan, but also from scientific institutions
across China as well as in the U.K. and Australia. It focused on the
residents of Wuhan, ground zero for COVID-19, where 9,899,828 people
took part in a screening program between May 14 and June 1, which
provided clear results as to the possibility of any asymptomatic
transmission of the virus.
Asymptomatic transmission has been the underlying justification of lockdowns enforced all across the world. The most recent guidance
from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) still states that the virus
“can be spread by people who do not have symptoms.” In fact, the CDC claimed that asymptomatic people “are estimated to account for more than 50 percent of transmissions.”
U.K. Health Secretary Matt Hancock also promoted this message, explaining that the concept of asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 led to the U.K. advocating masks and referring to the “problem of asymptomatic transmission.”
However, the new study in Nature Communications, titled
“Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly 10 million
residents of Wuhan, China,” debunked the concept of asymptomatic
transmission.
It stated that out of the nearly 10 million people in the study, “300
asymptomatic cases” were found. Contact tracing was then carried out
and of those 300, no cases of COVID-19 were detected in any of them. “A
total of 1,174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were
traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19.”
Both the asymptomatic patients and their contacts were placed in
isolation for two weeks, and after the fortnight, the results remained
the same. “None of detected positive cases or their close contacts
became symptomatic or newly confirmed with COVID-19 during the isolation
period.”
Further evidence showed that “virus cultures” in the positive and
repositive asymptomatic cases were all negative, “indicating no ‘viable
virus' in positive cases detected in this study.”
Ages of those found to be asymptomatic ranged between 10 and 89, with
the asymptomatic positive rate being “lowest in children or adolescents
aged 17 and below” and highest rate found among people older than 60.
The study also made the realization that due to a weakening of the
virus itself, “newly infected persons were more likely to be
asymptomatic and with a lower viral load than earlier infected cases.”
These results are not without precedent. In June, Dr. Maria Van
Kerkhove, head of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) emerging
diseases and zoonosis unit, shed doubt upon asymptomatic transmission. Speaking
at a press conference, Van Kerkhove explained, “From the data we have,
it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits
onward to a secondary individual.”
She then repeated the words “It’s very rare,” but despite her word
choice of “rare,” Van Kerkhove could not point to a single case of
asymptomatic transmission, noting that numerous reports “were not
finding secondary transmission onward.”
Her comments went against the predominant narrative justifying
lockdowns, and at the time the American Institute for Economic Research
(AIER) highlighted
that “she undermined the last bit of rationale there could be for
lockdowns, mandated masks, social distancing regulation, and the entire
apparatus of compulsion and coercion under which we’ve lived for three
months.”
Swift to act, the WHO performed a U-turn, and the next day Van Kerkhove then declared that asymptomatic transmission was a “really complex question … We don’t actually have that answer yet.”
“I think that that’s misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic
transmission globally is very rare. I was referring to a small subset of
studies,” she added.
However, the new Wuhan study seems to present solid, scientific
evidence that asymptomatic transmission is not just rare but
nonexistent. Given that it found “no evidence that the identified
asymptomatic positive cases were infectious,” the study raises important
questions about lockdowns.
Commenting on the study, The Conservative Tree House
noted that “all of the current lockdown regulations, mask wearing
requirements and social distancing rules/decrees are based on a complete
fallacy of false assumptions.” The evidence presented in the study
shows that “‘very rare’ actually means ‘never’ asymptomatic spread just
doesn’t happen – EVER.”
Such a large scientific study of 10 million people should not be overlooked, Jeffrey Tucker argued
in the AIER, as it should be “huge news,” paving the way “to open up
everything immediately.” Yet media reports have been virtually
nonexistent and “ignored,” a fact that Tucker explained: “The lockdown
lobby ignores whatever contradicts their narrative, preferring
unverified anecdotes over an actual scientific study of 10 million
residents in what was the world’s first major hotspot for the disease we
are trying to manage.”
The recent findings should enable society to reopen once more,
according to the AIER. Without asymptomatic transmission, “the whole
basis for post-curve-flattening lockdowns,” life should resume and “we
could take comfort in our normal intuition that healthy people can get
out and about with no risk to others.”
“We keep hearing about how we should follow the science,” Tucker
added. “The claim is tired by now. We know what’s really happening.”
He closed his commentary with the question: “With solid evidence that
asymptomatic spread is nonsense, we have to ask: Who is making
decisions and why?"
No comments:
Post a Comment