RT @matsumotoclinic: 実際に、ウイルス動態を比較したメタアナリシス研究では、無症状の場合と有症状の場合の双方において、ウイルス量は感染後数日以内にピークとなり、そのウイルス量は同程度であったという研究が示されています⬇️ https://t.co/fiVaK…
@BioTurboNick @Liz_Wheeler @Emily_Burns_V Yeah but do you? Viruses spread when there’s enough of a viral load in a symptomatic patient. If you have a fever and a cold you probably should not be at the dentist. See if you can understand this article https:/
RT @matsumotoclinic: 実際に、ウイルス動態を比較したメタアナリシス研究では、無症状の場合と有症状の場合の双方において、ウイルス量は感染後数日以内にピークとなり、そのウイルス量は同程度であったという研究が示されています⬇️ https://t.co/fiVaK…
@jewstein3000 Well the *viable* virus is what's significant for calling it an "infection." This meta-analysis shows that the virus itself is no longer viable within a couple of weeks: https://t.co/fGHCMzuhz0 Because SARS-COV-2 isn't a retrovirus, it can'
BUT.. difference between detectable & infectious “SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding in respiratory and stool samples can be prolonged, duration of viable…short-lived. SARS-CoV-2 titres in the upper respiratory tract peak in the first week of illness” https://t
RT @doreen_rabi: In Alberta, we have had lots of experience w/ moving too fast too soon on lifting restricitons wrt to COVID. On the 5-da…
RT @doreen_rabi: In Alberta, we have had lots of experience w/ moving too fast too soon on lifting restricitons wrt to COVID. On the 5-da…
RT @doreen_rabi: In Alberta, we have had lots of experience w/ moving too fast too soon on lifting restricitons wrt to COVID. On the 5-da…
In Alberta, we have had lots of experience w/ moving too fast too soon on lifting restricitons wrt to COVID. On the 5-day iso recommendation: The evidence says viral shedding peaks at 5-days, but ppl are still infectious until ~9 days. 1/8 https://t.co/z
@skyemarie3188 @FlyingWithSara CDC staff does not do the research...https://t.co/XvA4resCTD
@skyemarie3188 @FlyingWithSara Sure, here is your study: https://t.co/XvA4resCTD
@chefofmembers @mind_steps @c_drosten Und hier eine Metastudie dazu. " No study detected live virus beyond day 9 of illness, despite persistently high viral loads, which were inferred from cycle threshold values. " https://t.co/wvJ8a5oCfO alternative dazu
@DL_138 @BrettMercuri @RalphTheMouth81 I have looked through quite a few studies, and the majority seem to say that COVID is *most* transmissible in the first 5 days, but there is clear evidence of transmissibility up to around 9 days (from this meta analy
@pgonzrodriguez @ElisaFernndez1 La ref es esta: https://t.co/cm04xX4kRO Parece que tras una semana, si ya no hay síntomas, no se recupera virus “vivo” del paciente. Pero claro, más difícil hacer esa prueba que PCR
@joechan404 @SpaghettiWolf69 @ZaraRahim “SARS-CoV-2 viral load in the upper respiratory tract appeared to peak in the first week of illness, whereas that of SARS-CoV peaked at days 10–14 and that of MERS-CoV peaked at days 7–10.” https://t.co/10BBw45rrV
@iamshawnjones @CarlJuneau1 @ABC @GMA The data was clear over a year ago, and this is just one example that I have used myself for guidance https://t.co/txagkHwrEf
@ABC @GMA You mean that you failed to read the evidence from this meta analysis in The Lancet, which was published over A YEAR AGO?! Viral shedding goes on weeks or even months after viable virus is dead. Incompetence! https://t.co/txagkHwrEf
Science CDC should have sourced: https://t.co/20Ym1HHqOV https://t.co/jLim9Sgw8h https://t.co/bCwzK8DA0N https://t.co/GNNGQH2Nme
@Block_n_Block @hypercubexl @libbycwatson Yeah that one focuses on how breakthrough cases can clear infections quicker Here's one that indicates that most transmission occurs within five days of symptoms. It's a bit older but our understanding is that new
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@DrSomedayMaybe @efunkEM this is one of several papers on duration of infectiousness ~7-9 days. Somewhere on my feed is also a 2020 Chinese paper on covid infectiousness by day. (You could’ve just looked up the data instead of btchng about how people don’t
Para além do estudo referido no texto sobre o efeito da vacina e das VOC, temos também uma revisão sistemática mais antiga que resume que não se conseguiu isolar vírus viável a partir do 9º dia de sintomas: https://t.co/bbnu1vu8ZJ
@GandalfGrigioOf @diabolicus23 @GiovaQuez Noi positivi ai molecolari dopo 17giorni da prima positività, mia figlia piccola asintomatica ancora positiva dopo 21giorni. Ci hanno liberato, ma ti garantisco che molti ci evitano ancora, anche medici universita
@BradSiroky @AndrewMakeTweet @bylenasun Here are 2 https://t.co/Y0XQGpWSQk https://t.co/Y7mgx1jud2 They are balancing these data with concerns re health care staffing, business & thus product cost due to sick leave, etc. One can argue if they did i
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@VictorLicata1 Is The Lancet full of shit? https://t.co/5CNYuahHJL
@mandaAnon I wouldn't say it doesn't follow the science. There are papers on this. It's a tricky balancing act of avoiding another economic shutdown (which devastates people's lives) while relying on science to keep people safe. https://t.co/9rGjv1Cf6z h
@connorKer @NateSilver538 Yours is a reasonable question. I'm not familiar with this study; someone posted it in response to Nate as possible CDC data. It's technical, but I did follow assertion that peak COVID titres (related to transmissibility) are obse
@fnthawar I assume it is based on this https://t.co/igVlvjEfyc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
Here’s the year-old study. Omicron is different. Longer, unpredictable incubation period than Delta.
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@getupgetfree @stalinfan69 Probably for this reason: https://t.co/5evA1uDo4p And this reason: https://t.co/gpe35KT7mu By day 10 of infection followed by mask wearing, the virus should be cleared, but I think antigen tests should be required as well.
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@CassyWearsHeels That’s good however they state that people who are asymptomatic are infections which is nonsense. Enough of a viral load transmits infection exist only from day one day six of symptoms https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@Mau1019 @GeensDangles @thiccc_astley @irene_koo https://t.co/pU5BMOdPsi How are you so convinced with literally no effort?
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@PBSImpulse9 You’re only infectious when you are symptomatic. When you are sick stay home. It is a cool people have some common sense https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@Its_Velez If you’re sick stay home if you’re not sick you’re OK. Did your mom ever teach you anything? https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@temafudge There is an overwhelming body of evidence showing that he symptomatic people are not infectious, read it: https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@ErinBromage Is virus live? what do the viral cultures show?. Specificity of the test is probably about 60%… Who knows what you’re measuring. Even the New York Times knows that a positive test is not indicative of infectivity. READ: https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@InformedNJNurse Because even though they’re not totally correct we know there’s no such thing as asymptomatic spread https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a I have about 50 other articles that prove the same.
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@CDCDirector @CDCgov Incorrect. https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@fynn_fan This is exactly why nurses aren’t doctors. Essentially they’re probably better than doctors, but they’re NOT doctors. But lately the vast majority of doctors are not doctors but DINOS Landmark study that established excellence activity based on v
@kerpen Unfortunately every major corporation follows what they’re told by the CDC in lockstep. They’re wrong again of course. The viral load is large enough only between day one and day six of symptoms…S-Y-M-P-T-O-M-S!!! https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a asymptomat
@thebradfordfile Without question, actual article say that they’re wrong. https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a but why should They be influenced by facts now
@michaelmina_lab You really should’ve been a chef. Great name for a great chef…. Not so much for anybody in Medicine Where did you go to medical school? And at what cycle threshold should the test be run? https://t.co/yelJE0woGk Read it and weep https://
@ShikhaJainMD your Gods have clay feet. As a surgeon I was always skeptical. fleas were always ready to accept anything they were told. Here’s some more news for you: They still have the window of infectivity wrong: Great study in flea Journal Lancet: day
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
RT @meganranney: paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
paper #1 https://t.co/qbW06esJKc
@ErinBromage But does positive mean infectious, esp since pos results seem to vary individually to differently correlated viral loads? Recalled this study from last summer: "No study detected live virus beyond day 9 of illness, despite persistently high v
@KeshisCuties @AP There are systematic reviews and meta-analyses that agree with you. From The Lancet, it appears on average viral load from upper respiratory tract disappears around Day 9 of symptom onset. 5 days is not enough. https://t.co/FFfrP1s5UC
@lifeofajaybird Vaccinated Danes are more likely to never know they've had COVID. Unvaccinated Danes are more likely to realise they've had COVID after the presymptomatic infectious peak once it's too late. https://t.co/j5wC47J3iw
@DaveBeep @jburnmurdoch @michaelmina_lab Hello again. It’s even more outrageous to suggest infectious based on RNA shedding. In fact that is just a lie. Is this one outrageous too? https://t.co/GwrRJtas4j What about this one on infectiousness (based on me
@shalom08 There’s only sufficient viral load to be infectious starting the first day of symptoms and ending the sixth day of symptoms, symptoms. Symptoms. https://t.co/TKmPO6Zk7a
@guedes6838 @joaomiranda - Houve casos em que o teste PCR se manteve positivo por 83 dias depois de uma infecção. - Nenhum estudo detectou carga viral forte em assintomáticos. Fonte: https://t.co/iExKdWUmNZ https://t.co/6uqdXZan3O
@timtron2020 That's just false - you don't know what you are talking about. You can shed viruses before you get significant symptoms or even if you don't get significant symptoms. Omicron will probably change that too. You are on a road to irrationality.
See https://t.co/7uxwm0pmm5 for details.
@Galettesauciss2 @AnotherGenro @Jesberger @vincentglad Charge maximale "entre 2J avant l’apparition des signes cliniques et 5J après" selon le Conseil scientifique : https://t.co/NPRH2WsFY8 Etude britannique qui précise que c'est surtout durant les 5 prem
… although RNA can be detected for substantially longer periods (https://t.co/8yyabE7WdF). There have been very rare case studies of prolonged infections in highly immunocompromised people but these would be detected by standard PCR screening of donor (htt
@DoubleBogie6 @Thirteenmark13 @nationalpost From meta-analysis of 79 studies on SARS-CoV-2, eight studies on SARS-CoV, 11 studies on MERS-CoV "No study detected live virus beyond day 9 of illness, despite persistently high viral loads, which were inferred
@ceskykundicky @wenia6killer @kmotra_liska @JirkaVaclav A navíc má kolega Wenia6killer pravdu... https://t.co/7ExuLPolCV https://t.co/9vLq9E0jxl https://t.co/bchJjyK6qy https://t.co/LeFzoZK1av https://t.co/ruSQT4DQRQ
@WalleyRay Virel shedding, which would yield a PCR test, for up to 83 days post infection so that should be quite a common scenario... https://t.co/O4ZUxxhF6v
@Independent_ie Viral shedding which will give a positive PCR test can continue up to 83 days after infection. This is a peer reviewed study from the Lancet https://t.co/O4ZUxxhF6v
@tomasoconnell1 @KalOdinson @Independent_ie The main difference is that antigen tests are 80-90% effective at showing if you're infectious. PCR will be positive well after that and before it. PCR tests can be positive up to 83 days after infection https://
Si queréis información de primera mano y contrastada de lo que es el COVID 19 y cómo se desarrolla os paso este estudio: https://t.co/0R8t32RZ3f Este hilo suelta algunas tonterías mezcladas con medias verdades, sobre todo la primera parte.
@arneduncan You’re a blithering idiot! The vaccines don’t work! Fascist much Arne? https://t.co/Y0GLRAwJSZ
@iNSiG9FiX @MartinJuhl2 Denne metaanalyse undersøger varighed af viral shedding. Interessant hvor længe det findes i urin og afføring. Max 9 dages smitsomhed fra luftveje. https://t.co/ctZc1LKjBf
@drsarahcroke @annao_tree @Eddybotil @tomiteacher @debrakidd @DrAnneMurphy @sajidjavid “No study detected live virus beyond day 9 of illness, despite persistently high viral loads” https://t.co/GR8k32X5Kc