Subscriber-unavailabile said:I have a question. And not I'm starting E36 M3, but how many of you heard about the "levels" of the viral load of Covid?
I listen to a lot of podcast(imho) where's there's not bias to this or that side. I've heard a lot here lately about the COVID testing being too sensitive.
From my understanding America's testing is unlimited on how much of the strain you have. Most countries only test for certain viral load in your system and if low enough you test negative. Where as USA testing system you can have a 1% viral load and your put into the statistics.
Again not trying to start E36 M3. But if I'm allowed to walk into a store and buy cigarettes that kill more, over 500,000 in the same time period, how much is this virus more then an element of we risk ourselves to everyday life to....
I don't think it's starting E36 M3, but it's important to mention that this is not anything new. Some people point to this phenomenon as a way of invalidating it's usefulness, but it is how we've done things since viral testing was a thing.
Depending on the contagion, any number of testing methods are used. If we only tested sick people and only used the antibody test, it wouldn't tell us much about the virus. All it would say is "we know you're sick, and this test says you're sick." Testing for the presence of the virus in your snot is a very valuable data point. It helps determine things like exposure-to-infection rates. When you back it up with other forms of testing, we can learn so much more about viruses.
The Flu test is similar. If you go to an urgent care with flu symptoms, they don't do an antibody test to confirm you have a flu infection, they do a snot test to see if you have the presence of flu virus.
Important distinctions: With many contagions, they develop several tests based on how they are able to develop a testing method. They usually attempt to at least come up with two tests: 1) a contagion test. This tests for the physical presence of the contagion but says little or nothing about whether or not your body has become infected with it. Keep in mind that our bodies are confronted with literally billions of viruses and bacteria every second from any one of millions of classifications. This test is like saying "yes, you have a rattlesnake on your lap," but doesn't say whether or not you've been bitten. 2) antibody/antigen test. This doesn't test for the contagion at all, it tests to see if your body has produced known antigens. This does indicate that you have or had an infection... meaning, your body has achieved a viral load AND your body has mounted an attack. This test is like saying, "we have no idea if there was a rattlesnake, but you have been bitten." These two tests together cover the other unknown factor... those who have had a significant viral load, but have not had either an infection NOR an immune response. Many people have been colloquially calling this "asymptomatic" during COVID, which is not exactly correct. Some others have invoked the term Typhoid Mary, which is also not accurate.
In terms of covid (and many other contagions) it's important to know the terms and use them correctly to prevent misinformation or being counterproductive to the cause.
Test positive: You have been tested for the presence of the contagion, but may or may not have an infection or symptoms. It's there, but that can't predict what your body will do with it.
Infection: You have reached a viral load to a level that your body has mounted a defense. In the case of C19, this may or may not manifest as symptoms
Asymptomatic: You have the infection (body mounted a defense) but it has not manifested as physical symptoms
Carrier: You have the presence of the virus (with or without infection and with or without symptoms) and are able to pass along that virus. For instance, you inhaled some of the virus and sneezed it on someone, and you either had an asymptomatic infection, or never contracted an infection. In this way it is possible for you to not become infected, but still pass it to someone. Last I heard regarding C19, this is a rare form of transmission.
Given all the possible ways for C19 to be transmitted without having symptoms is one of the troubles with this one.
I was listening to an NPR segment about this with the head of UPMC's Covid prevention whatever. He was talking about how this flies in the face of everything we have learned. We have always been taught that when you're sick, you have symptoms, and you cough into your elbow and everything is good. He likened this to a thunderstorm. If you look out your window and there is a thunderstorm with lighting strikes in your front yard, you have that logic programmed into your brain. You don't go out and play in your front yard. Your brain processes the rain, the dark skies, the rumbles, and flashes of light. With Covid, he said, it's like doctors are asking people to believe that the lighting now comes 14 days before the thunderstorm, and you won't know you've been hit with lighting until the rain actually arrives. He was sympathetic to the hoaxer crowd because who would believe that complete change in paradigms? You look out your window and its sunny and clear, but we're supposed to believe we'll be hit by delayed-reaction lightning? That was his take on it. Most diseases like this with a higher R0 value (flu, cold, etc) don't have the delayed incubation. When we're sick we stay home and all is well. Getting people to believe that they need to hide in a bunker when they feel fine isn't easily swallowed for those less apt to conform to what they don't understand.
