
© Frank Rumpenhorst/picture-alliance/dpa/AP ImagesGermans repatriated from Wuhan, China, arrive at an army barracks on 1 February to be examined for signs of infection with the new coronavirus.
A
paper published on 30 January in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) about the first four people in Germany infected with a novel coronavirus made many headlines because it seemed to confirm what public health experts feared: that someone who has no symptoms from infection with the virus, named 2019-nCoV, can still transmit it to others. That might make controlling the virus much harder.
Chinese researchers had previously suggested asymptomatic people might transmit the virus but had not presented clear-cut evidence. "There's no doubt after reading [the NEJM] paper that asymptomatic transmission is occurring," Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told journalists. "This study lays the question to rest."
But now, it turns out that information was wrong. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI), the German government's public health agency, has written a letter to NEJM to set the record straight, even though it was not involved in the paper.
The letter in
NEJM described a cluster of infections that began after a businesswoman from Shanghai visited a company near Munich on 20 and 21 January, where she had a meeting with the first of four people who later fell ill. Crucially, she wasn't sick at the time: "During her stay, she had been well with no sign or symptoms of infection but had become ill on her flight back to China," the authors wrote. "The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-nCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak."
But the researchers didn't actually speak to the woman before they published the paper. The last author, Michael Hoelscher of the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Medical Center, says the paper relied on information from the four other patients: "They told us that the patient from China did not appear to have any symptoms." Afterward, however, RKI and the Health and Food Safety Authority of the state of Bavaria did talk to the Shanghai patient on the phone, and it turned out
she did have symptoms while in Germany. According to people familiar with the call, she felt tired, suffered from muscle pain, and took paracetamol, a fever-lowering medication. (An RKI spokesperson would only confirm to Science that the woman had symptoms.)
Comment: The current state of technological advancement has brought us face to face with problems Darwin probably never dreamed of. The cold and heartless solutions to those problems which Darwinian evolution might be used to support would deny the humanity of the person implementing those solutions. It is no wonder then why Darwin struggled with the implications of his ideas. For how can heart and soul be accounted for when there is no spirit guiding the process. If all life is 'natural selection' and 'random mutation', then there should be no moral qualms with killing an unborn child or anyone for that matter. Yet, something deep inside reviles such a choice. How can this contradiction exist if 'natural selection' is the process by which we came to be? There are those who would contort their minds through mental gymnastics of the most excruciating kinds in attempts to fit the facts to the theory, but the simplest solution is to get rid of the theory and see what better fits the facts. Intelligent Design does provide an avenue for heart and soul to exist and would thus provide a more human lens through which to view dilemmas and problems of the modern kind.