Michael Haynes
\nLIFESITE News<\/p>\n
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page.\u202fView it here.<\/a>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n ANALYSIS<\/strong><\/p>\n WUHAN, China, December 23, 2020\u00a0(LifeSiteNews)<\/a> \u2013 A study of almost 10 million people in Wuhan, China, found that asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 did not occur at all, thus\u00a0undermining the need for lockdowns, which are built on the premise of the virus being unwittingly spread by infectious, asymptomatic people.<\/p>\n Published in November in the scientific journal\u00a0Nature Communications<\/em>,\u00a0the paper<\/a>\u00a0was compiled by 19 scientists, mainly from the Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, but also from scientific institutions across China as well as in the U.K. and Australia. It focused on the residents of Wuhan, ground zero for COVID-19, where 9,899,828 people took part in a screening program between May 14 and June 1, which provided clear results as to the possibility of any asymptomatic transmission of the virus.<\/p>\n Asymptomatic transmission has been the underlying justification of lockdowns enforced all across the world. The most\u00a0recent guidance<\/a>\u00a0from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) still states that the virus \u201ccan be spread by people who do not have symptoms.\u201d In fact, the CDC\u00a0claimed<\/a>\u00a0that asymptomatic people \u201care estimated to account for more than 50 percent of transmissions.\u201d<\/p>\n U.K. Health Secretary Matt Hancock also\u00a0promoted<\/a>\u00a0this message, explaining that the concept of asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 led to the U.K. advocating masks and\u00a0referring<\/a>\u00a0to the \u201cproblem of asymptomatic transmission.\u201d<\/p>\n However, the new study in\u00a0Nature Communications<\/em>, titled \u201cPost-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly 10 million residents of Wuhan, China,\u201d debunked\u00a0the concept of asymptomatic transmission.<\/p>\n It stated\u00a0that out of the nearly 10 million people in the study, \u201c300 asymptomatic cases\u201d were found. Contact tracing was then carried out and of those 300, no cases of COVID-19 were detected in any of them. \u201cA total of 1,174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19.\u201d<\/p>\n Both the asymptomatic patients and their contacts were placed in isolation for two weeks, and after the fortnight, the results remained the same. \u201cNone of detected positive cases or their close contacts became symptomatic or newly confirmed with COVID-19 during the isolation period.\u201d<\/p>\n Further evidence showed that \u201cvirus cultures\u201d in the positive and repositive asymptomatic cases were all negative, \u201cindicating no \u2018viable virus’ in positive cases detected in this study.\u201d<\/p>\n Ages of those found to be asymptomatic ranged between 10 and 89, with the asymptomatic positive rate being \u201clowest in children or adolescents aged 17 and below\u201d and highest rate found among people older than 60.<\/p>\n The study also made the realization that due to a weakening of the virus itself, \u201cnewly infected persons were more likely to be asymptomatic and with a lower viral load than earlier infected cases.\u201d<\/p>\n These results are not without precedent. In June, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the World Health Organization\u2019s (WHO) emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, shed doubt upon asymptomatic transmission.\u00a0Speaking<\/a>\u00a0at a press conference, Van Kerkhove explained, \u201cFrom the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual.\u201d<\/p>\n She then repeated the words \u201cIt\u2019s very rare,\u201d but despite her word choice of \u201crare,\u201d Van Kerkhove could not point to a single case of asymptomatic transmission, noting that numerous reports \u201cwere not finding secondary transmission onward.\u201d<\/p>\n Her comments went against the predominant narrative justifying lockdowns, and at the time the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER)\u00a0highlighted<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cshe undermined the last bit of rationale there could be for lockdowns, mandated masks, social distancing regulation, and the entire apparatus of compulsion and coercion under which we\u2019ve lived for three months.\u201d<\/p>\n Swift to act, the WHO performed a U-turn, and the next day Van Kerkhove then\u00a0declared<\/a>\u00a0that asymptomatic transmission was a \u201creally complex question \u2026 We don\u2019t actually have that answer yet.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI think that that\u2019s misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare. I was referring to a small subset of studies,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n However, the new Wuhan study seems to present solid, scientific evidence that asymptomatic transmission is not just rare but nonexistent. Given that it found \u201cno evidence that the identified asymptomatic positive cases were infectious,\u201d the study raises important questions about lockdowns.<\/p>\n Commenting on the study,\u00a0The Conservative Tree House<\/a>\u00a0noted that \u201call of the current lockdown regulations, mask wearing requirements and social distancing rules\/decrees are based on a complete fallacy of false assumptions.\u201d The evidence presented in the study shows that \u201c\u2018very rare\u2019 actually means \u2018never\u2019 asymptomatic spread just doesn\u2019t happen \u2013 EVER.\u201d<\/p>\n