Table of Contents
Introduction
“As Virus Spreads, C.D.C. Draws Up an Urgent Battle Plan”, reads the headline of a December 4 article in the New York Times by Rony Caryn Rabin and Apoorva Mandavilli.
“With coronavirus infections soaring across the nation,” the lead paragraph says, “federal health officials on Friday urged Americans in the most forceful language yet to take steps to protect themselves—starting with consistent, proper use of masks—and pressed local governments to adopt 10 public health measures deemed necessary to contain the pandemic.”
The reference is to a policy guidance document published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in its journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). The document is titled “Summary of Guidance for Public Health Strategies to Address High Levels of Community Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and Related Deaths, December 2020”.
The Times quotes the former CDC Director Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, who served under President Barack Obama (while Joe Biden was Vice President), saying that the document shows that the CDC is awakening from its “politics-induced coma”. What it means, according to Frieden, is that public health officials at the CDC are “aligning themselves more with science, which also aligns them more with the Biden administration”.
Further into the article, after again emphasizing the CDC’s policy recommendation on mask use, the Times claims that “asymptomatic individuals . . . are responsible for about 50 percent of transmissions.”
The Times was parroting that claim from the CDC paper, which states that there is “approximately 50% of transmission from asymptomatic persons”.
We may stipulate that this statement does align the CDC more with the politics of President-elect Joe Biden. However, the public must be made to understand that the statement is false and aligns the CDC against the science.
Moreover, the CDC knows that the statement is false.
Additionally, the CDC must surely understand that false claims such as this will be uncritically parroted by mainstream media outlets like the New York Times in ways that serve to manufacture consent for the authoritarian lockdown measures that Biden favors, including business closures or restrictions and executive mask-wearing orders.
The false claim causes people to be irrationally fearful of other people since anyone could be among the “silent spreaders” who never develop symptoms of COVID-19 but who nevertheless efficiently transmit the novel coronavirus that causes it, SARS-CoV-2.
In truth, the scientific evidence indicates that asymptomatic transmission is rare. People who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 but never develop COVID-19 appear not to be a major contributing factor in the community spread of the coronavirus.
There are studies that estimate that individuals who are presymptomatic, meaning that they do go on to develop disease symptoms, are responsible for a large proportion of community spread. Contact tracing studies have documented cases of evident presymptomatic transmission, but we do not know the extent to which this explains community spread. The estimates reported matter-of-factly by the media come from modeling studies that have serious methodological flaws and limitations biasing results artifactually toward a higher proportion of presymptomatic spread.
The CDC also knows that when it produces false claims like this one about asymptomatic transmission, it is not going to be “fact checked” by the media’s self-proclaimed “fact checkers”.
Articles like this one from the New York Times that repeat such false claims are not going to get flagged on Facebook or other social media for spreading misinformation, and users who share the misinformation will not be penalized in social media algorithms or have their account suspended.
While there is certainly misinformation being spread on social media and by alternative online media, it is the government and mainstream media, including self-proclaimed “fact checker” sources, who are the greatest purveyors of lies and deceptions.
I challenge the “fact checkers” to prove me wrong by doing objective journalism for a change and either applying their own standards universally, rather than selectively “fact checking” only information that doesn’t align with certain political agendas, or by abandoning this whole “fact check” charade altogether.
Let’s now take a look at the claim, show why it’s a bald-faced lie, show why the CDC knows it’s false, and expose the incontrovertible hypocrisy of the faux “fact check” sources that engage in censorship of factual information while greatly contributing to the problem of a misinformed public.
🔓Continue reading with a FREE or premium membership.
Log in below or choose your membership.


Regarding lies, a media lie is the same thing as a religious media idol because a lie is presented as falsely being a principle which is a false being and a false God, and these lies should be correctly labeled as idols instead of just being lies.
Curious though. If asymptomatic carriers are ultimately NOT the cause of the spread of the virus, than I’d be interested to hear your opinion on the effectiveness of the vaccine (understanding that there are obvious safety issues). It’s my understanding that the vaccine is going to reduce the effects of the virus rather than preventing contracting and spreading the virus. I’m seeing the argument that people will still be able to catch and spread the virus, and wont have symptoms so it could make them more dangerous asymptomatic carriers. However, if we’re saying here that asymptomatic carriers are not the major cause of the spread, does that mean that the vaccine ultimately WILL be doing it’s job?
Tiffany, I have pondered the same question. It could mean that the vaccine might reduce transmission, but we have to keep in mind that the vaccine does not confer the same kind of immunity as natural infection, so this does not necessarily follow.
First show proof of an actual virus. Show just one published study.
Here are many:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=isolation+whole+genome+sequencing+sars-cov-2
I think we need evidence that the virus identified here actually causes the disease (Covid-19). I thought it was just suspected, but not actually confirmed.
The people claiming that COVID-19 is not caused by SARS-CoV-2 are the same people who deny that the virus has been isolated. They are wrong on both counts, but it would be superfluous to the purpose of this article to demonstrate their further error.
Dear Jeremy, I’m fascinated by your in-depth analysis of the subject and I’ve learned a lot. I do have a question on how the connection between SARS-CoV-2 and its manifestation as COVID-19 is detected. Both originally and on a mass basis I guess. Is it possible that the symptoms a person experiences or a medical professional observes are from a different type of virus like a flu or cold virus, and how is the casual relationship established when the PCR test is just identifying a fragment of a particular RNA strand. I don’t know much about virology but I’m interested and any light you could shed on that aspect would be great. Thank you again for the fantastic article above.
Hi Ben,
Many symptoms of COVID-19 overlap those due to different diseases caused by other viruses. A discussion of how we know SARS-CoV-2 causes COVID-19 is beyond the scope of this article, which addresses the false claim that COVID-19 is not caused by SARS-CoV-2 because the virus does not exist. The discussion of causality with recognition that the virus exists is a whole other discussion that I do not at the moment have time for and which I see no need for as I have not seen people who acknowledge the existence of SARS-CoV-2 deny that it causes disease in humans.
We at double fact checked dot com find the above information to be true and accurate. While the data is growing and changes from day to day the information stated is accurate to the time of release and remains the most accurate computation of data on this subject. Our verdict is True.
Thank you for such an in depth explanation. I will be looking at more of your work. I very much wish to be useful in helping to stop the deliberate spread of misinformation.
?
I would love a discussion of asymptomatic
versus vaccine shedding…what is the difference? Thank you
Asymptomatic transmission is transmission of the wild virus from people with infection but no disease. Vaccine “shedding” is transmission of vaccine-strain virus, which can only occur with “live” virus vaccines like the oral polio vaccine.
Great article thank you. Key Question: In the studies on 40%-50% spread, do pre-symptomatic individuals include those who show mild symptoms that have not yet become severe?
Yes. Such studies include anyone with symptoms. They are not limited to those with moderate or severe disease.