Its aerosolized. The droplets you talk about arent the big problem, The shit floats for hours in a confined space.
As far as tests, we've been through that already too. The PCR tests being done are largely finding dead nucleic acid and do not indicate a true infection.
What Happened to Dr. Fauci's Earlier Concerns About COVID Test Sensitivity?
One of the most frustrating aspects of COVID-19 coverage has been the emphasis on “cases,” reinforced by Dr. Anthony Fauci. In fact, he was wringing his hands about rising “case” numbers on CNN in early October. These numbers are actually positive tests. The New York Times and several experts admitted in late August that up to 90% of positive PCR tests were not indicative of the active illness that could be transmitted to others.
Why COVID-19 Testing Is A Tragic Waste
Once again, most of the virus that is expelled through mouth and nose is attached to water droplets and much of that is caught by simple cloth masks which reduce the spread of the virus. They aren't perfect but they work surprisingly well. See verifiable data in sources of the CDC article I posted. What gets past the masks does indeed linger for a long time, which reinforces the need to catch most of it in masks worn by everybody.
The PCR tests do report positive in some --many, actually-- cases where the person has already recovered but your statement that they "are largely finding dead nucleic acid and do not indicate a true infection" is an inappropriate extrapolation of the results in the NY Times article. Most people being tested are doing so because they feel sick... and their positive tests indicate an ongoing infection. It's true that the NY Times reported on the deficiencies of using 40 cycles, and one lab reported close to 90% would have been negative if the threshold was 30:
"Officials at the Wadsworth Center, New York’s state lab, have access to C.T. values from tests they have processed, and analyzed their numbers at The Times’s request. In July, the lab identified 872 positive tests, based on a threshold of 40 cycles.
With a cutoff of 35, about 43 percent of those tests would no longer qualify as positive. About 63 percent would no longer be judged positive if the cycles were limited to 30.
In Massachusetts,
from 85 to 90 percent of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. “I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,” he said."
However, a threshold of 30 will miss a LOT of actual positives. So, a broad statement that 90% of PCR tests were not indicative of the actual transmissible illness is incorrect.
A positive test, even one at 40 cycles, is still useful beyond quarantining the individual. It should set off contact tracing to figure out who they were in contact with in the past (as in, while they were still infectious) to reduce the spread. Many doctors strongly disagreed with Dr. Mina's statement in that article. I've talked to doctors and they all tell me 40 cycles is the worldwide standard for just this reason. These are not false positives, even if they no longer indicate active infection. Keep in mind the difference between a "good swab" and a "bad swab" is easily 3 Ct counts... a lot of the testing has done by people swabbing themselves in drive through settings, and they don't generally ram that swab back far enough. My wife did a self swab in a drive through once, and later was tested in a facility, and she described a big difference between her swabbing herself and the testing person doing it.
It would be good if Ct scores were routinely released to doctors to guide their patients' follow up, as one in the low 30s would indicate somebody definitely actively infectious and one closer to 40 would indicate someone who probably should be retested to confirm not likely infectious and tracing done for the past two weeks with testing of contacts.
As to:
Oceanslider said:
Birx says government is classifying all deaths of patients with coronavirus as 'COVID-19' deaths, regardless of cause | Fox News
You do realize that was published on APRIL 07? Holy out of date data, Batman! A lot has changed since then in our understanding of the virus, the pandemic overall, and reporting standards. Most states now, and for many months, report "probable" COVID-19 deaths separately from confirmed ones. For example here in Indiana, we've had 5418 total COVID-19 deaths (confirmed only), plus 267 probable deaths that mostly stem from before testing was sufficiently available, but still ever week there are a couple added due to uncertainties in the diagnosis or situation for one reason or another. The 5418 number is very solid, to the extent that you guys can trust an organization run by Republicans up and down the line
There used to be a figure for nursing home deaths but it doesn't seem to appear on the dashboard anymore.
In an article about a month and half ago, the number had topped 2000 deaths so represents upwards of 50% of the Indiana deaths.
This just in: Here's our friend Oceanslider breaking quarantine to catch some waves:
Damn, the animation didn't work. Here's the original link:
Apparently White ain't "Good and Pure" anymore...
