Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.
We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.
Thanks!
Click here for the original OP:
Spoiler!
Apparently the CoronaVirus can survive on a inanimate objects, such as door knobs, for 9 days.
California coronavirus case could be first spread within U.S. community, CDC says
By SOUMYA KARLAMANGLA, JACLYN COSGROVE
FEB. 26, 2020 8:04 PM
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is investigating what could be the first case of novel coronavirus in the United States involving a patient in California who neither recently traveled out of the country nor was in contact with someone who did.
“At this time, the patient’s exposure is unknown. It’s possible this could be an instance of community spread of COVID-19, which would be the first time this has happened in the United States,” the CDC said in a statement. “Community spread means spread of an illness for which the source of infection is unknown. It’s also possible, however, that the patient may have been exposed to a returned traveler who was infected.”
The individual is a resident of Solano County and is receiving medical care in Sacramento County, according to the state Department of Public Health.
The CDC said the “case was detected through the U.S. public health system — picked up by astute clinicians.”
Officials at UC Davis Medical Center expanded on what the federal agency might have meant by that in an email sent Wednesday, as reported by the Davis Enterprise newspaper.
The patient arrived at UC Davis Medical Center from another hospital Feb. 19 and “had already been intubated, was on a ventilator, and given droplet protection orders because of an undiagnosed and suspected viral condition,” according to an email sent by UC Davis officials that was obtained by the Davis Enterprise.
The staff at UC Davis requested COVID-19 testing by the CDC, but because the patient didn’t fit the CDC’s existing criteria for the virus, a test wasn’t immediately administered, according to the email. The CDC then ordered the test Sunday, and results were announced Wednesday. Hospital administrators reportedly said in the email that despite these issues, there has been minimal exposure at the hospital because of safety protocols they have in place.
A UC Davis Health spokesperson declined Wednesday evening to share the email with The Times.
Since Feb. 2, more than 8,400 returning travelers from China have entered California, according to the state health department. They have been advised to self-quarantine for 14 days and limit interactions with others as much as possible, officials said.
“This is a new virus, and while we are still learning about it, there is a lot we already know,” Dr. Sonia Angell, director of the California Department of Public Health, said in a statement. “We have been anticipating the potential for such a case in the U.S., and given our close familial, social and business relationships with China, it is not unexpected that the first case in the U.S. would be in California.”
It is not clear how the person became infected, but public health workers could not identify any contacts with people who had traveled to China or other areas where the virus is widespread. That raises concern that the virus is spreading in the United States, creating a challenge for public health officials, experts say.
“It’s the first signal that we could be having silent transmission in the community,” said Lawrence Gostin, director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law. “It probably means there are many more cases out there, and it probably means this individual has infected others, and now it’s a race to try to find out who that person has infected.”
On Tuesday, the CDC offered its most serious warning to date that the United States should expect and prepare for the coronavirus to become a more widespread health issue.
“Ultimately, we expect we will see coronavirus spread in this country,” said Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “It’s not so much a question of if, but a question of when.”
According to the CDC’s latest count Wednesday morning, 59 U.S. residents have tested positive for the new strain of coronavirus — 42 of whom are repatriated citizens from a Diamond Princess cruise. That number has grown by two since Messonnier’s last count Tuesday, although the CDC was not immediately available to offer details on the additional cases.
More than 82,000 cases of coronavirus have been reported globally, and more than 2,700 people have died, with the majority in mainland China, the epicenter of the outbreak.
But public health leaders have repeatedly reminded residents that the health risk from the novel coronavirus to the general public remains low.
“While COVID-19 has a high transmission rate, it has a low mortality rate,” the state Department of Public Health said in a statement Wednesday. “From the international data we have, of those who have tested positive for COVID-19, approximately 80% do not exhibit symptoms that would require hospitalization. There have been no confirmed deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States to date.”
CDC officials have also warned that although the virus is likely to spread in U.S. communities, the flu still poses a greater risk.
Gostin said the news of potential silent transmission does not eliminate the possibility of containing the virus in the U.S. and preventing an outbreak.
“There are few enough cases that we should at least try,” he said. “Most of us are not optimistic that that will be successful, but we’re still in the position to try.”
Originally Posted by DaFace:
OK, this helps to make sense of it a lot:
At least it's not "we played with the numbers a bunch and came up with a new answer!"
And yet anytime a public official gets in front of a camera its "why aren't you taking this seriously!?!??
Again - they have a vested interest in saying something other than "man, we really fucked up..."
I don't see any reason to believe a word of their rationalizations at this point. They stated a presumption of effective social distancing and now they're gonna say "well our definition of 'effective' was 50% compliance..."
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And yet anytime a public official gets in front of a camera its "why aren't you taking this seriously!?!??
Again - they have a vested interest in saying something other than "man, we really ****ed up..."
I don't see any reason to believe a word of their rationalizations at this point. They stated a presumption of effective social distancing and now they're gonna say "well our definition of 'effective' was 50% compliance..."
Uh huh...
Do you think that they used a percentage compliance figure in the models? If so, what do you think it was?
I presume that one day, we'll get the chance to see the models. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And yet anytime a public official gets in front of a camera its "why aren't you taking this seriously!?!??
Again - they have a vested interest in saying something other than "man, we really fucked up..."
I don't see any reason to believe a word of their rationalizations at this point. They stated a presumption of effective social distancing and now they're gonna say "well our definition of 'effective' was 50% compliance..."
Uh huh...
Well of course we complied after you fuckers scared the holy shit out of us. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Do you think that they used a percentage compliance figure in the models? If so, what do you think it was?
I presume that one day, we'll get the chance to see the models.
Honestly? No, I really don't think they did. Because if so, explain how their 4/1 update was STILL so far off. They already saw what efforts had been undertaken and the models were still dart throws.
I think they worked backwards from raw data derived from Italy, Spain and China. And I think we already know that the trash Imperial College model was based on a SARS and MERS model that idiot Ferguson recycled - I think the IMHE piggy backed on that piece of crap and tried to smash it together with Italy data (as the most transparent source of information available) and other datapoints emerging from Western Europe.
I cannot overstate enough how badly I think this people fucked this thing up. I think you could've given an upper level stats class this assignment and they'd have come up with better models than this.
I cannot convince myself that any intelligent people actually started a clean sheet analysis of this and came up with these pieces of shit, no. These were recycled and reverse engineered models that they were trying to rush to to the press so they could be the first to get their names out there. They're complete tripe and all of these excuses are just attempts to rehab what should be a far more shattered reputation than they seem to be suffering.
The fact that anyone takes anything they say at face value right now demonstrates how little attention they paid to how wrong these jackasses were. [Reply]
Oklahoma State's Mike Gundy told reporters today he's shooting for a May 1 restart. "We can swab them and clear them to come into the building and get back to work."
Dr. Fauci just said there was a large disparity in covid impacting black people, as they tend to have higher numbers of things such as diabetes, heart disease, etc. There seems to be other factors at play here too that they are investigating.
The president mentioned a rate of "3x to 4x". Unsure of what he's referencing. [Reply]
I don't want this to be political, as I have no political agenda here... but the president is talking about freezing funding to the WHO at some point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Honestly? No, I really don't think they did. Because if so, explain how their 4/1 update was STILL so far off. They already saw what efforts had been undertaken and the models were still dart throws.
I think they worked backwards from raw data derived from Italy, Spain and China. And I think we already know that the trash Imperial College model was based on a SARS and MERS model that idiot Ferguson recycled - I think the IMHE piggy backed on that piece of crap and tried to smash it together with Italy data (as the most transparent source of information available) and other datapoints emerging from Western Europe.
I cannot overstate enough how badly I think this people ****ed this thing up. I think you could've given an upper level stats class this assignment and they'd have come up with better models than this.
I cannot convince myself that any intelligent people actually started a clean sheet analysis of this and came up with these pieces of shit, no. These were recycled and reverse engineered models that they were trying to rush to to the press so they could be the first to get their names out there. They're complete tripe and all of these excuses are just attempts to rehab what should be a far more shattered reputation than they seem to be suffering.
The fact that anyone takes anything they say at face value right now demonstrates how little attention they paid to how wrong these jackasses were.
How could they not have made some assumption? Social distancing is one of the most important mitigation efforts used to fight this thing. That doesn't make any sense to me.
As to your question, I presume because they either didn't have this 90% compliance revision on 4/1, or did and simply hadn't run the model with that revised percentage. It doesn't have to be nefarious. You seem to think it is. What's the motivation for them to do so? [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
I don't want this to be political, as I have no political agenda here... but the president is talking about freezing funding to the WHO at some point.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Honestly? No, I really don't think they did. Because if so, explain how their 4/1 update was STILL so far off. They already saw what efforts had been undertaken and the models were still dart throws.
I think they worked backwards from raw data derived from Italy, Spain and China. And I think we already know that the trash Imperial College model was based on a SARS and MERS model that idiot Ferguson recycled - I think the IMHE piggy backed on that piece of crap and tried to smash it together with Italy data (as the most transparent source of information available) and other datapoints emerging from Western Europe.
I cannot overstate enough how badly I think this people ****ed this thing up. I think you could've given an upper level stats class this assignment and they'd have come up with better models than this.
I cannot convince myself that any intelligent people actually started a clean sheet analysis of this and came up with these pieces of shit, no. These were recycled and reverse engineered models that they were trying to rush to to the press so they could be the first to get their names out there. They're complete tripe and all of these excuses are just attempts to rehab what should be a far more shattered reputation than they seem to be suffering.
The fact that anyone takes anything they say at face value right now demonstrates how little attention they paid to how wrong these jackasses were.
The part I don't get that I still keep hearing "it's coming...". The virus has hit every freaking state already. Kansas has been locked down just as long as NY has. CA was locked down before NY, etc., etc. NY\NJ are skewing the numbers tremendously and for obvious reasons for the most part. But what I don't get is people saying to the "rest of the country" that just wait, "it's coming" meaning the numbers in other states are going to spike. Like it's some sort of insect making it's way across the country. Or some army marching along.
When I hear people say that it makes me wonder if they realize all the other states for the most part are already taking steps to mitigate? So if the virus is already in Kansas and Kansas has been taken mitigation steps for going on 3 weeks now you have to ask yourself, if the worst is still yet to come then WTF did we lock down for the last 3 weeks? Kinda comes off like "psyche! It wasn't your turn yet!" [Reply]
