Just today the WHO Says Asymptomatic Spread of Covid-19 is very rare, positive Impact on Cuddling?

MattsWeather

Today the World Health Organization (WHO) has said that while asymptomatic spread of Covid-19 is possible, it is "very rare" that it spreads via asymptomatic people. If this is indeed true, how would this impact your confidence in safely returning to a normal level of cuddling? See article, google "Covid-19 Asymptomatic" for articles from other sources: https://cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

geoff1000

@MattsWeather
The UK data suggests 80% of infected people are asymptomatic, because they aren't reporting for "track and trace".

The risk of spread from them is probably low, but only because most people don't interact very closely for very long. It is similarly very rare for a sexually-transmitted disease to be passed between people, because they are rarely having sex.

Most cuddlers on this site say they enjoy sustained, close-up, face-to-face conversation. I don't think there is any published data for how risky this is for transmission ( with or without masks), because : It is quite a rare activity, so there isn't much available data ; and it is a private activity, which breaches most current lockdown rules, so participants are unlikely to share that they've been doing it.

CNYMike

The WHO walked that back. https://www.syracuse.com/coronavirus/2020/06/who-clarifies-comments-confirms-asymptomatic-people-can-spread-coronavirus.html So cuddling is right where it was a couple of days ago I'm afraid.

The WHO are incompetent. I like the band much better.

xandriarain

@MattsWeather I think what will be really telling is whether or not the case numbers spike in a week or so after all of these protests. If the case numbers don’t have a huge spike I think that will lead to politicians easing up on a lot of restrictions. If the case numbers spike then we could see some of the more extreme stay at home orders put back in place. As @geoff1000 said when it comes to cuddling you have two people with prolonged contact, definitely close enough to share aerosol droplets from the breath. My stance is that If you are Cuddling and one person has the virus the chance of transmission is much higher than just sitting 3 feet apart and having a casual conversation. Now there are ways to mitigate risk like wearing masks or mainly spooning or other positions we are you are not facing eachother. My method is just to ask the person I am cuddling where they have been/ whom they have been around and asses their overall risk for a potential exposure.
My thoughts when it come to WHO and the CDC is to take anything they say with a grain of salt, they have been inconsistent throughout this pandemic and its clear that both organizations are corrupt and they don’t really know what they are doing. We all have to get back to living our lives at some point you just have to use your own judgement about how and when to resume certain activities

geoff1000

@xandriarain
Good point about the anti-racism protests, the profile of cases, particularly in certain cities, might tell us something ; although given the relatively greater effect on older people, we probably need to look at data two weeks on, to allow for "second-generation" transmission.

I understand people wanting to express their view in the time-honoured way, but doing so during a pandemic, seems counterproductive. If the US government had forced that many black people and their supporters to crowd together, the world would have accused it of attempted genocide.

cuddleaddict

THIS HAS NOW BEEN RETRACTED after massive backlash by the scientific community. The original comment apparently was answering a press question and was not representing the WHO official stance on the matter. Far more studies conclude the opposite & the WHO official stance remains the same.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/06/09/asymptomatic-coronavirus-spread-who/

The knowledge of this virus is expanding at an amazing pace. But it's inexcusable that a single individual in the WHO organization can cause such misunderstanding.

geoff1000

@cuddleaddict
Agreed.

There is too much reluctance, by those in authority, when put on the spot ; to say, "I don't know". Maybe organisations should get better at anticipating what they might be asked, so they can have accurate answers. The odds of losing on the first go of Russian Roulette, is 1 in 6, which is "quite low" by some interpretations ; but when the consequences are so severe, it is a risky behaviour which should be discouraged.

Given that most people with Covid-19 symptoms are isolating themselves more than general ( or are being isolated in hospitals ) ; it is likely that most transmission is being caused by people who don't have symptoms. If the first symptom was a big bright red letter C appearing on a person's forehead, there wouldn't have been a pandemic.

MonkeyNeedsAHug

@geoff1000

You wrote: If the US government had forced that many black people and their supporters to crowd together, the world would have accused it of attempted genocide.

^
This, I believe, is the point. BLM protesters aren’t on the streets for a lark. The government has forced that many black people and those who believe Black Lives Matter out onto the streets. They might not have done it by executive order, but they have done it, nevertheless. (I was planning to hedge my statement by saying they may not have done it at gunpoint... but it seems to me that they have.)

“Attempted genocide”, you say?
That shoe fits already.

ultimateApp

One thing for sure is that the amount of active cases are starting to go up faster for my county & many counties in my state, faster than ever in my county & faster than several last weeks for most of those many counties, so the extreme quarantine will likely be back.

transgirlkatie

I don't believe theres gonna be another lockdown. Especially after the protests because problem a) it can no longer be enforced due to a lack of trust of the police. b) the double standard public health officials set by saying mass gatherings are ok as long as you have a good enough of a reason. While I understand why BLM did what they did, but at the same time if you say one group can ignore the rules because they have a "good enough" of a reason then why should other groups follow the rules because they could just make up a good reason? I mean with cuddling you could argue your doing it for mental health reasons if your severely depressed, which in a sense is a good reason to do it

geoff1000

In my town there is an anti-meat advert, and an anti-racism advert. The anti-meat advert is a poster on a billboard, the anti-racism advert is a slogan sprayed on a bike shelter. I find it ironic that a part of society which complains at being unfairly assumed to be violent criminals ; demonstrates against this prejudice, by breaking the law and engaging in violence.

In parts of Africa, black people are dying at an alarming rate, through illness, starvation, oppression and war ; and yet the BLM movement seems focused entirely on the plight of black people in USA and Europe. It seems to me that far more black lives would be saved, by donating whatever it cost the protesters to attend their gatherings, to charities which improve the conditions in Africa ; or is it only black lives outside Africa that matter ?

Covid-19 has a disproportionate effect on BAME people in the West, but when it hits Africa in earnest, our tens of thousands of deaths will be tiny by comparison. There will be no bodycam footage, showing which protesters passed in on, earlier in the chain of transmission.

A lot has been made of "white privilege" by accident of colour of birth ; but black people outside Africa, have a lot of privilege over those inside Africa, and should perhaps be more mindful of those less fortune by accident of place of birth. Leaving them to fall further behind, seems like "outside Africa" privilege.

Some white Americans have and do, treat black Americans badly ; but 360,000 soldiers from the Union died in the Civil War to ensure the end of slavery. They aren't all bad.

sjb1973

Sorry to keep this thread off-topic, but I'd highly recommend the documentary '13th' by Ava DuVernay for historical and contemporary context to the Black Lives Matter movement.

I can't speak for black people as a middle-aged white dude, but I can understand why they feel now is the time to take to the streets in the US and Europe. Not only to protest the murder of George Floyd and the police brutality that followed, but because there's a real opportunity to effect change and influence those in power. We can care about civil rights in the US and the lives of people in Africa at the same time. They're not mutually exclusive. But I understand why black people in the west might believe they have more direct influence on the former, particularly at this moment in time.

geoff1000

I see Donald Trump is planning a campaign rally, so it seems that among the many justifications for large gatherings is, reelecting him.

It's time to start opening up the country.

mgs

Weather you symptomatic or asymptomatic positive is positive and u can still spread Covid it is not rare. Transmission is determined by proximity, and duration of exposure with is increased while cuddling

mgs

Im just saying

geoff1000

UK scientists are saying that if the UK lockdown had been implemented a week earlier, the death toll could have been halved. My feeling is that it was only the world news showing the severe spread and fatalities, which made the public ready to accept such measures.

As the death rates in countries are falling, citizens are losing their appetite for lockdown. However, with less than 10% of people even possibly having "herd immunity" and no proven vaccine, we ae in no better position than we were before the lockdown. The only extra defence we now have, is "track and trace", but that requires people to self-report their symptoms ; and in any case, many people are asymptomatic.

Leaving lockdown now, seems rather like leaving a shelter while the air-raid is still happening.

I am encouraged by the idea of antibody therapy, using the blood of those who have recovered, to help those who have just caught it. If the worst effect of the virus can be reduced from "life changing" ( including life ending ), that will be a big improvement. Russian Roulette would be a lot less scary, if the players instead pointed the revolver at their feet.

BbwCuddleBuddy7

Can we keep our political views off cuddle comfort? This should be a safe place for everyone to get cuddles.

geoff1000

@BbwCuddleBuddy7
That works for me.

The problem is that cuddling is on hold for political reasons determined by the coronavirus, and some people think it's OK to break the law and risk other people's lives to engage in it.

Activities are being allowed again gradually, but if they are being done in order of increasing coronavirus spread risk, cuddling would be last. I really hope things get back to normal soon, else everyone will have been so starved of contact, that we forget how much we enjoy it.

desi_babe

@BbwCuddleBuddy7 everything is political, particularly anything that stems from policy decisions or public health. Cuddling doesn't exist in a vacuum separated from reality, and discussing how the world affects the cuddling bubble doesn't make this space not "safe".

geoff1000

The party we should all be voting for is . . . . The Cuddle Party 😊

geoff1000

https://events.donaldjtrump.com/events/tulsa-oklahoma-rally-june-19

Those attending the Trump rally have to waive any right to sue if they catch Covid-19 ; but ( as we keep posting to those on here, who are happy to risk themselves for a cuddle ) the ones who suffer won't be them, it will be the ones further along the transmission chain.

I think the really dangerous aspect of this situation, is that deaths cannot be traced back through the many people and their activities which passed on the virus. Society cannot use legal accountability, and individuals cannot be motivated by their conscience.

I suppose the same is true of any global issue, where the bad effect on each victim, is caused by the cumulative bad actions of many people.

Conversely, bad effects can be prevented, by the good actions of anonymous people. Imagine if you cancelled a cuddle session, and when the pandemic is over, a dozen people came to your door to thank you for breaking the transmission chain, which would otherwise have killed them.

I haven't cuddled anyone since my country went into lockdown, but I wasn't doing much anyway, so I haven't really been affected that way. However, I'd like to thank everyone who has stopped ( and probably wouldn't have been caught ) for the sacrifice they have made.

MissAdventurous

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/06/10/873473805/u-s-hits-2-million-coronavirus-cases-as-many-states-see-a-surge-of-patients

Grace_Anna

I read an article in the New York Times suggesting that a brief hug was surprisingly low risk even if the person you're hugging has corona virus and they cough during the hug. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/well/family/coronavirus-pandemic-hug-mask.html. The other day, a biochemistry professor I'm friends with on Facebook posted an article about how unlikely it would actually be to catch the virus from touching a surface. Some caution is warranted. But, some people are extremely anxious over a few seconds of contact or touching a potentially contaminated surface even if the risk is low. But, they're not at all concerned about talking to someone for a long time while being closer than 6 feet even if that may actually be higher risk. It is so easy to find people willing to stand closer than they should and talk even if you don't want them to. But many are afraid of a fraction of a second of touch. Sometimes, I wonder if it would actually help fight the disease more if people had been allowed to have a brief occasional hug or socially distant face to face communication instead of total lockdown. It seems like too many have got a major case of quarantine fatigue and are now doing whatever.

I would love to be able to just go out on the street and give a bunch of people free hugs after this is all over.

geoff1000

@Grace_Anna
There are many mechanisms of transmission ; and which is more likely, depends on what you do.

UK scientists say that with "normal" behaviour, each infected person will pass the virus onto about 3 others ; before they either self-recover, or become very sick. Thinking of the many interactions we normally have with people, over the several day risk period, if only 3 people would be infected, the risk from any individual action is indeed very low ; but the high number of them, makes it cumulatively risky. The behaviour changes try to push that rate below 1.

I agree that some of the changes seem counter-productive. Instead of shopping in silence, people either say "thanks" each time they get close, or spend 10 minutes talking to a stranger while they are queuing at a "safe" distance of 6 feet.

The data suggests that BAME people are more at risk than white people, and I suspect one reason is that BAME people are typically more friendly, particularly to each other. The virus spreads by "social" contact ; being in shared spaces, talking, hugging, kissing and generally acting like gregarious human beings. My observation is that we white folks are typically more ignorant in our behaviour.

People who generally avoid other people, are probably at lower risk ; and the particularly nasty aspect of the virus, is that it exploits the very characteristic which makes us human ; and hence the only way to reduce the spread, has been for us to become de-humanised.

Modern life, with international travel, made it easier for the virus to spread around the world ; but it also has the communication methods, which allow many of us to socialise and work remotely. One good outcome may be that we have been forced more quickly to find ways to reduce the amount of resource we consume and CO2 we create.

Grace_Anna

I suspect that people who don't live alone are at a MUCH higher risk of contracting and passing on the virus. I haven't been sick from anything in over 5 years, yet I'm a hugger. Whereas, when I didn't live alone, I got sick more often. Yet, we normalize touch for people who live together even if it's not brief, assuming that's it's completely safe. However, if one or more people in a household are going outside the household for work, groceries, etc., it's isn't completely safe for members of the same household to be touching each other. In some cases, it's VERY not safe. The food processing plants are responsible for a lot of the transmission in my area. People were just trying to go to their essential job, then they came home to their families who might have had to go to their essential job elsewhere... It would have been safer if those people had chosen to try to be more distant in their own homes with their loved ones or even separated and lived alone for a time if possible. But, they needed the non-sexual and sexual contact and it would be asking too much for them to go without those needs met for a day or a week, let alone months or years like those of us who don't live with someone. Some people even moved in with their significant other because of the virus, so they wouldn't have to be lonely or miss out on contact. It would have been much safer for everyone had they not done that!! I haven't even hugged someone for 3 months for fearing of getting them sick. Yet few of them live alone and they're not going without contact. And the people they're getting contact from are most likely more of a risk than I'd ever be.

I hope once all this virus stuff is over, we'll stop feeling guilty for having a perfectly normal human need. Obviously, some of the don't touch people you don't live with logic started long before the virus or else sites like this wouldn't exist.

geoff1000

@Grace_Anna
Interesting point about not getting sick. I live alone, and have had about one day off each decade of my working life.

The song "Rudolph, the red-nosed reindeer" is the story of someone who was different to his colleagues, eventually proving to be very useful in a crisis. The scene of Blind Pugh guiding the pirates at night in "Treasure Island" is similar.

Employers often like "friendly" people, and interview them to check this characteristic. Maybe for certain jobs, this is a bad idea, and we should specifically look for people who are less sociable. Someone who looks after a closed hotel, probably needs a state of mind that most of us don't have.

Imagine what the transmission rate of Covid-19 would have been, if everyone in the world was as physically friendly as the most friendly ? I think the death rate would have been ten times higher.

Therefore, perhaps as well as the healthcare professionals, key workers, and those who stopped cuddling ; we should give a thank to all those who were practicing "social distancing", before the world became aware of the threat. Those who on this forum complain at their lack of success in meeting someone, probably saved many lives.

love2snowboard

WHO... meh

ubergigglefritz

@geoff1000 "the particularly nasty aspect of the virus, is that it exploits the very characteristic which makes us human ; and hence the only way to reduce the spread, has been for us to become de-humanised."

Beautifully written. And so sad. 😞 This whole situation just sucks. Sigh...

geoff1000

@ubergigglefritz
❤️