[M T]

There was/is a theory that most of the cases are cause by super spreaders.  I guess, by that, they mean certain people are more prone to spread the disease than others.  If that's the case, it might also be true that these two individuals just aren't high volume producers of the virus.  



Not trying to throw water on this positive, but rather wondering if anything became of the super spreader theory?  I sure do hope that masks, even cloth ones, help as much as the CDC is suggesting.

If you read the article, you would know that stylist A apparently infected stylist B, and 4 housemates (3 are family) of A also got the disease.
Two other contacts of stylist B got the disease (after spending time unmasked with A).  No other stylists got the disease (not stated whether they spent time unmasked with A or B).

What I wonder about is why the Health Department only did contact tracing on the clients seen after the first symptoms of A and after the first symptoms of B, rather than going back in time a few days.

(The CDC hosts a number of articles it deems interesting.  The CDC did not do the study or write it up.  The report was (or will be) published elsewhere.  It is the 'CDC's article' like it would be the 'library's "Moby Dick"')

[M T]

There was/is a theory that most of the cases are cause by super spreaders.  I guess, by that, they mean certain people are more prone to spread the disease than others.  If that's the case, it might also be true that these two individuals just aren't high volume producers of the virus.  



Not trying to throw water on this positive, but rather wondering if anything became of the super spreader theory?  I sure do hope that masks, even cloth ones, help as much as the CDC is suggesting.

If you read the article, you would know that stylist A apparently infected stylist B, and 4 housemates (3 are family) of A also got the disease.
Two other contacts of stylist B got the disease (after spending time unmasked with A).  No other stylists got the disease (not stated whether they spent time unmasked with A or B).

What I wonder about is why the Health Department only did contact tracing on the clients seen after the first symptoms of A and after the first symptoms of B, rather than going back in time a few days.

(The CDC hosts a number of articles it deems interesting.  The CDC did not do the study or write it up.  The report was (or will be) published elsewhere.  It is the 'CDC's article' like it would be the 'library's "Moby Dick"')