You may have heard that people could be infected while presenting no symptoms: the asymptomatics. But, what if it were the case that some, if not all, got a false positive from the test? That, in truth, they were negative, but tested positive in fact. A simple way to then explain the incongruence of the resulting non-presentation of symptoms, would be to tag the fortunate subjects asymptomatic—carriers. Double check? Take appropriate safety measures, should(n’t) they be again tested; perhaps at a different location and using a different make and brand of equipment and/or method. What are the relative costs and risks? Someone suggested that a significant proportion of the infections recorded for political office holders were of this kind. A ruse? Not improbable, at worst.
Reflecting on why a new variant of the infamous entity that caused the dis-ease, which marred social dancing in 2020, emerged towards the end of the year. It seems plausible—at least not entirely implausible—that, since, apparently, its emergence coincided with some period of vaccine trials …, that it was the product of virus/vaccine research gone awry, or the response of infected persons that had been ‘trially’ vaccinated, …. Because, apparently, the virus had lived without evolving a kin or dialect for most of 2020, until …. And, apparently, the new variant is localised. God knows how this dialectal continuum emerged.