[M T]

Is it possible that some, perhaps many, of asymptomatic cases (with reported fewer antibodies) never really completely kill off the virus in 2 weeks and become low rate infection sources?  Maybe their R0 is 0.1 or so, but they continue being infectious longer than those that got sicker & got more antibodies.  I could imagine a scenario some of the asymptomatic might never develop the virus in the airways (for nasal swabs or CT scan detection) but carry them somewhere else.   (But, then, wouldn't they infect their own airways?  Maybe they've got enough antibodies to discourage that.  Maybe that's what happens in some of the delayed onset cases.)

A paper that I probably wouldn't have paid much attention to, except that it fit Santa Clara County's data, is
A Very Flat Peak:Exponential growth phase of COVID-19 is mostly followed by a prolonged linear growth phase, not an immediate saturation

While the transition out of an exponential phase is relieving, the roughly constant number of daily new infections differ widely, range from around 50 in Singapore to around 2000 just in Lombardy (Italy), and 7600in Spain. The daily new infection rate of a region seems to depend heavily on the time point in the exponential evolution when the restrictive measures were adopted, rather than on the population  of  the  region.  It  is  not  easy  to  point  the  critical  source  of  these  persistent infections.  We  attempt  to  interpret  this  data  using  a  simple  model  of  newer  infections mediated  by  asymptomatic  patients,  which  underscores  the  importance  of  actively identifying any potential leakages in the quarantine.

Sorta like neutrinos, we (currently) only see the asymptomatic by the effects they cause.

[M T]

Is it possible that some, perhaps many, of asymptomatic cases (with reported fewer antibodies) never really completely kill off the virus in 2 weeks and become low rate infection sources?  Maybe their R0 is 0.1 or so, but they continue being infectious longer than those that got sicker & got more antibodies.  I could imagine a scenario some of the asymptomatic might never develop the virus in the airways (for nasal swabs or CT scan detection) but carry them somewhere else.   (But, then, wouldn't they infect their own airways?  Maybe they've got enough antibodies to discourage that.  Maybe that's what happens in some of the delayed onset cases.)

A paper that I probably wouldn't have paid much attention to, except that it fit Santa Clara County's data, is
A Very Flat Peak:Exponential growth phase of COVID-19 is mostly followed by a prolonged linear growth phase, not an immediate saturation

While the transition out of an exponential phase is relieving, the roughly constant number of daily new infections differ widely, range from around 50 in Singapore to around 2000 just in Lombardy (Italy), and 7600in Spain. The daily new infection rate of a region seems to depend heavily on the time point in the exponential evolution when the restrictive measures were adopted, rather than on the population  of  the  region.  It  is  not  easy  to  point  the  critical  source  of  these  persistent infections.  We  attempt  to  interpret  this  data  using  a  simple  model  of  newer  infections mediated  by  asymptomatic  patients,  which  underscores  the  importance  of  actively identifying any potential leakages in the quarantine.

Sorta like neutrinos, we (currently) only see the asymptomatic by the effects they cause.