Doesn't even 'walk it back'. She stands by the fact that the only Data they have shows asymptomatic people infecting others is rare - but supposes there could be other magic data out there somewhere that says otherwise - therefore we just don't know.
"Science".
Probably threatened with being fired, will probably be fired anyway.
She says the 40% is based on models. So the science says it's rare. The now debunked "models" say 40%.
You're right...this woman was thoroughly reprimanded and probably threatened at some point. Her face in the photo in the article is pretty telling. You could put that in any dictionary defining "I'm screwed."
There was a study done where they tracked some 500 or so people who had exposure to asymptomatic positives and guess what.... not a single fucking person got it.
Between March 5 and April 21, researchers at the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) tracked cases of COVID-19 among pupils and teachers at 10 high schools and five elementary schools in New South Wales. The researchers found that out of 863 pupils and teachers who had had close contact with an infected person, just two coronavirus cases were likely to have been transmitted in school — or 0.23%.
Early on in the study, 18 people across the 15 schools tested positive for the coronavirus, all of whom were immediately told to self-isolate. By the end, just two more tested positive, despite over 800 having close contact with those 18 people.
Two, maybe four cases and that's not even confirming they caught it from the infected classmates/faculty.
“Some estimates of around 40 percent of transmission may be due to asymptomatic [cases], but those are from models. So I didn’t include that in my answer yesterday but wanted to make sure that I made that clear,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a WHO epidemiologist and technical lead on the pandemic, said during a news conference Tuesday.
So, it's very rare, but today it's "maybe 40%" according to the "models." That's a pretty big difference. Probably the same models they used to predict two million American deaths. I know Andrew Cuomo tried his best to personally hit that number, but still came up way short.
Seems like it. I thought that was exactly the case when the CCP Virus crap hit its peak. There was conflicting information being presented all day, every day so nobody knew what was going on. That's what sends people into a panic.
They're doing something similar to the tests. For weeks they were going on and on about testing...then you would hear how "THIS test is the best!" "No THIS test is the best!" Then, "Well no test is completely accurate and we get a lot of false readings from all of them."
I'm sure glad we shut down the country when they were 100% sure of all the facts, right?
If you're not sure if mass protests are going to increase covid, and you want to make a double-confusing prediction to cover your bases no matter what happens, this seems like a slick way to do it.
Doesn't even 'walk it back'. She stands by the fact that the only Data they have shows asymptomatic people infecting others is rare - but supposes there could be other magic data out there somewhere that says otherwise - therefore we just don't know.
"Science".
Probably threatened with being fired, will probably be fired anyway.
She says the 40% is based on models. So the science says it's rare. The now debunked "models" say 40%.
You're right...this woman was thoroughly reprimanded and probably threatened at some point. Her face in the photo in the article is pretty telling. You could put that in any dictionary defining "I'm screwed."
There was a study done where they tracked some 500 or so people who had exposure to asymptomatic positives and guess what.... not a single fucking person got it.
There was a similar study like that in Australia.
Two, maybe four cases and that's not even confirming they caught it from the infected classmates/faculty.
Sauce: http://archive.is/uDBFI
I can just see a foot stomp and "you've screwed up our second wave!"
So, it's very rare, but today it's "maybe 40%" according to the "models." That's a pretty big difference. Probably the same models they used to predict two million American deaths. I know Andrew Cuomo tried his best to personally hit that number, but still came up way short.
SPEZ: It's "rare" when based on actual science.
But "rare" was based upon actual data. Let's stick with the actual data, since the models have already screwed over the world once.
Thanks for pointing that out...I did mention that in another comment but added the correction above. That's a HUGE detail.
We place more trust in our institutions than we do in ourselves.
Looking to institutions like the WHO or even our own CDC to guide us on what to do has proven to be disastrous.
Is this just creating chaos on purpose?
Seems like it. I thought that was exactly the case when the CCP Virus crap hit its peak. There was conflicting information being presented all day, every day so nobody knew what was going on. That's what sends people into a panic.
They're doing something similar to the tests. For weeks they were going on and on about testing...then you would hear how "THIS test is the best!" "No THIS test is the best!" Then, "Well no test is completely accurate and we get a lot of false readings from all of them."
I'm sure glad we shut down the country when they were 100% sure of all the facts, right?
"I already euthanized a lot of people to protect them from all this. Now I feel like that was a mistake." - Cuomo
PS I Love your username
They’ve already contradicted themselves like 10 times lol. They are a fucking joke
WHO, Media and Dem's scammed population to achieve power and control.
God is in control.
If you're not sure if mass protests are going to increase covid, and you want to make a double-confusing prediction to cover your bases no matter what happens, this seems like a slick way to do it.
I hope she doesn't come down with COVID
Probably got a call from Xi himself