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 petegz28:
The irony is I bet most if not all the CP experts claiming it doesn't work would be asking for the drug if they got sick.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Its still being used as a treatment all over the world, yet its settled science. Go figure. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Okay so let's take sentence one: a lot of the best treatment came from early teatment...
Now let's go to sentence two: you don't know if they got better from the treatment of not.....
Now let me aKs you....do you want to forgo the treatment to find out the answer to sentence 2?
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I don't understand why so many people are so hell bent on dismissing a drug that at worst helps a decent amount of people if used early. The drug is as safe as most any other prescription drug in existence and its cheap as hell.
Our HR manager has RI and has been on the drug for years with no issues.
Best toss it to the side because people about to die didn't recover most of the time.
Because you don't know if it works in those scenarios and there are downstream effects. Sorry Pete, thats why we do these studies you don't like, to find out true effects and differences.
The majority of people get over this with mild symptoms, no? If so, why would you want to give them something that could have QT elongation as a side effect if they were going to get better anyway?
Then you have Marcellus example where if you start treating everyone with it, you may have runs on it where the RI guy can't treat himself with it. [Reply]
I don't have a dog in the fight. I don't know if it works or not. I know we set up these trials certain ways to find out and the ones who interpret them seem to find whatever they're saying they're find.
Like I said, it does have side effects so it's not necceasirly safe to starts saucing out left and right. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
The irony is I bet most if not all the CP experts claiming it doesn't work would be asking for the drug if they got sick.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I don't know about the experts but you and marclueless can have any and all of my share of it.:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Because you don't know if it works in those scenarios and there are downstream effects. Sorry Pete, thats why we do these studies you don't like, to find out true effects and differences.
The majority of people get over this with mild symptoms, no? If so, why would you want to give them something that could have QT elongation as a side effect if they were going to get better anyway?
Then you have Marcellus example where if you start treating everyone with it, you may have runs on it where the RI guy can't treat himself with it.
There are several documented cases of people being very sick that claim they got better once given HCQ. I guess that's just one giant coincidence
HCQ has been around for over 50 years and suddenly it will kill you?
Originally Posted by petegz28:
There are several documented cases of people being very sick that claim they got better once given HCQ. I guess that's just one giant coincidence
HCQ has been around for over 50 years and suddenly it will kill you?
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
It could be a coincidence, thats why we run studies like we do. Statistically, over the large scale and setup correct, things bear themselves out.
Originally Posted by O.city:
I don't have a dog in the fight. I don't know if it works or not. I know we set up these trials certain ways to find out and the ones who interpret them seem to find whatever they're saying they're find.
Like I said, it does have side effects so it's not necceasirly safe to starts saucing out left and right.
Frankly I don't have a "dog in the fight" either other than I find it amazing people still dismiss it outright when all over the world its still being used as a treatment. That doesn't make sense with it being settled science.
Then the same people want to use these crazy outlier cases like the one random 22 year old healthy guy who got permanent heart damage from Covid as if that's a real statistical danger for anyone who gets Covid but want to outright ignore many many doctors who say HQC has worked for their patients.
As an aside, DR's aren't researchers or statisticians, so when it comes to this stuff, you've always gotta take everything as a whole.
I dont' know if they're using it around the world or have stopped. I'd guess, though, that if it were working as well as some think, we'd know about it by now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
It could be a coincidence, thats why we run studies like we do. Statistically, over the large scale and setup correct, things bear themselves out.