Asymptomatic spreaders

welcome to this video, we are analyzing what proportion of people infected with coverage 19 could be

asymptomatic

. We now know that 8% of people who are covered 19 are reported to have mild illness and may feel minimally or slightly unwell. feel unwell for a few days and then recover, but we know that 20% have a more serious condition, 16% have a serious infection to the point of needing hospital care and support and we know that 5 or 6 per cent get sick critically and Of course, we know that maybe 1% die, but I noticed that recently Dr. Falchi in the United States was saying that up to 50 percent of infected people have no symptoms, which is very interesting, which What this means is that there could be many people. who have had their illness or simply do not know they have had it, perhaps half of the people do not present any symptoms; in other words, they are

asymptomatic

.

This is great for the people involved, but what we don't know is how many of them are going to be infectious? We would assume that if they have the infection but have no symptoms, they are still infectious and infected people can shed a hundred billion viral particles in a day, thus potentially infecting large numbers of other people as we go. I've seen the super spreader phenomena in previous videos in this series, so this was something from the British Medical Journal, so I put the reference in and then of course I'll put it there in the notes.

Now, this is not a research article as such. It's more of an opinion piece, but if it makes it to the British Medical Journal then it's married. I was thinking about covering 19. Four-fifths of the cases are asymptomatic. The figures from China indicate this, so this means an even higher proportion than Dr Falco suspects this says up to 4/5 could be asymptomatic. Now I want to say it's 80%, isn't it? So what is the evidence for this? We're not saying it's true, but this is what it is. Discussing so much new evidence from China, the vast majority of coronavirus infections are asymptomatic according to this study.

Where did this come from? The data size is very limited and I have been eagerly searching for more data but haven't found any yet. Hopefully now what happened was that in China they started to approach things from April 1st in a more prospective way and started collecting data on all of their new cases because the number of new cases now being recorded in China is relatively low, so this gave the opportunity for prospective studies, so far a lot of the hype has been retrospective, looking back at what has happened, prospective data says, well, it's today, I'm going to collect data from now on and of course that means we can collect exactly the data.

We want prospective studies to be potentially much more valid than retrospective studies in research and what they found were one hundred and thirty five hundred and sixty six new infections which 78% identified in the 24 hours until the afternoon of Wednesday the first of April was when They started collecting new samples from new people, so many of them were people arriving in the country, so to enter China now in most places you have to take a test to enter zv+ or not, so They were taking people who were entering the country and they combined that with people who were testing in the country and when they combined those two they found that 78% were not showing symptoms, so a lot of people were trying to enter China feeling fine, but when they were asked the test and they were found to have the virus and this just shows the importance of testing because testing is a search light that illuminates the virus, the virus cannot hide from testing while it is hiding a lot from us right now , just shows why we need it.

There was a lot more testing done, so the founders of all the people that we tested through a hundred that tested positive for the 78 virus at that time had no symptoms and this is interesting now, it could mean that they are pre symptomatic because we know that people infectious for a few days before developing symptoms, but it could also mean that some of them were genuinely asymptomatic and were never going to develop symptoms, so the data doesn't allow us to differentiate between those two categories yet, but the fact that 78% You could be shedding the virus up to 100 billion viral particles a day but having no symptoms could explain some of the spread we've seen around the world now.

The other thing this means is that the virus has been spreading for longer than we thought it could. It is already quite widespread. I've been suspecting this for some time, so if we look at the relatively high mortality rates in my country now, for example, these people who are dying now probably had their day one the first day they were symptomatic two three four five. weeks ago, even potentially even more easily two to four weeks ago, meaning they would have an incubation period of two to 14 days before that, meaning these people got the infection long before the lockdown and they got it primarily from community spread. the virus was spreading from person to person and that is true in almost every country in the world except Australia, most cases in Australia still come from people outside the country but a strain requires a lot of testing so can be controlled well. about that, while in most other countries we don't know, the virus was probably spreading in the community much earlier than we thought, certainly in my country it could have spread in mid-February through community spread, so This offers an interesting possibility that many more people could already be infected than we thought they are just asymptomatic, therefore, asymptomatic infected people, what we have to do is identify who they are because so far in my country, at least in Most countries, we haven't been doing this, so we need to identify these people with Testing this is just another illustration of why testing is so important, then we can isolate people with the virus and we can put them in quarantine their contacts and this allows us to be much more precise and much more surgical in the way we attack this virus rather than this beating of everyone in the community now the South China Morning Post was citing classified data so we can't understand this, but there is no reason to assume that they are lying about it.

China had found 43,000 asymptomatic infections through contact tracing of 43,000. In other words, what that means is that someone was known to have the virus, so health personnel in the Chinese community, whether they were Whether that person had the virus was symptomatic or not, it doesn't matter the point is that someone was tested for the virus and then they tested them. who their contacts were, who could have potentially been infected, and when they examined those contacts they found that 43,000 of them were asymptomatic. It would have been nice to know this in January. I must say that when the Chinese realized this, we do not know.

Maybe that's why it's classified now, having said that many of us were warning about this virus in January, so if other governments around the world would have known, but certainly if we had known that there were 43,000 asymptomatic people in China potentially spreading 100 billion viral particles. one day each, it would have been useful to have information a long time ago, but we didn't have it, but now we have it and it's interesting, if these people were asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, they didn't detect us, but it seems that many were completely asymptomatic. So again, this Chinese data from the Chinese Morning Post says that many people have the virus and we have looked at 43,000 of them who turned out to have the virus but had no symptoms.

It is interesting to note that this contradicts the assumptions of the World Health Organization. Until recently, the World Health Organization was saying that most transmission is driven by symptomatic individuals and they were saying, in fact, I still think they are still establishing that asymptomatic sar is rare and is not a major driver of transmission. , well, it seems that if this data is correct, The World Health Organization has been wrong once again, that's what it seems now, this is another study, I know it's the same one, this guy, this Italian professor, professor of clinical immunology at the University of Florence in northern Italy, claims a beautiful city in northern Italy.

There is evidence that most people infected by the virus do not show symptoms, so this professor claims that he very much agrees with this, so dr. Foutch says 50%, this Chinese study says seventy-eight percent and this guy says that most people infected with the virus don't show symptoms, which is good for them and that's great, but of course they could be spreading it in an isolated village. About 3,000 people in northern Italy saw the number of people with 19-4 covered by more than 90% in 10 days by isolating people who were symptomatic and asymptomatic. Now this is the study of the professor I am citing.

I'm not even going to utter the intent. pronounce Sergio is a name, let's call Professor Sergio. I'm sure you won't mind, so I had this town in mind, so it's an isolated town where they tested 3,000 people in northern Italy, which of course was the epicenter of the European crisis and Our Brave Ones and the 3,000 people tested now made 3,000 people, which means they would find the people who tested positive and were symptomatic, but it also means they found the number of people who tested positive and were symptomatic, so this means they were able to isolate everyone. people who tested positive for the virus, whether symptomatic or asymptomatic;

In other words, they were able to isolate everyone and the result was that the number of people with 19 covered symptoms fell by 90 percent from 90 percent in 10 days, so let me ask you: would you like that? reduce the number of people with coverage 19 symptoms in your country, would you like to reduce that number by 90 percent in ten days? Well, the answer is yes, we would love to do it. Well, this Italian data says it can do it or what you have to do is test everyone, then the people who are symptomatic and positive for the virus, you isolate them and the asymptomatic people who are positive for the virus, you isolate them exactly from the same way, so this means that if we knew everyone who had the virus now, if we have testing because 3,000 is a good number, you can extrapolate from 3,000 quite accurately if we knew then we could reduce symptomatic people by 90%. in 10 days, which means that we would reduce sick people by 90% and critical people. people by 90% and it means we reduce deaths by 90%, although there would be a time lag between people becoming critical and dying longer, but symptomatic people within 10 days, deaths will decrease in the 2 3 4 weeks later. that if we could see where this virus was, in this example where everyone was tested, we could see where the virus is, you can really have dramatic effects on the spread of this virus through targa, late selective isolation, specific quarantine, but, Of course, the only way I can do this is on a population scale, so my country, with sixty million people, would need sixty million tests.

It is coming, but it has not arrived yet. So how many people in Europe, for example, have been exposed to the virus? Some immunity is two percent, it's five percent. Is it ten percent? We don't really know because we don't have enough testing, but it could well be five to ten percent, so the encouraging thing here is that we might be further along the curve than we thought, but we do want dramatic improvements. We need a drastic increase in testing, then we can isolate people who are infected, everyone else can go back to work, and we can expect symptomatic people to drop by ninety percent in ten days.