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:
No, it isn't. I hate that analogy. Seatbelts are about driving which is a privilege not a right. There is a significant difference. I appreciate and understand the sentiment but I hate that analogy.
Hey, you know I love you, man. If we could get within six feet I'd bro hug you.
I think the thing that's fascinating about the vaccination reluctance is that it points out the world we live in, which is not necessarily the world that we like to think we live in.
We all like to imagine that we're lions, wandering the plains at will, masters of our destiny and slave to none. It's a noble thought.
But the truth is that we're all house cats. We're domesticated and we have to be. We can't have 7 billion lions wandering the plains because we'll all kill each other. We have to co-exist and respect each others' food dishes and litter boxes.
The way we got here is both proof of that and the result of that. We got to this spot because we're not solo hunter-gatherers any more. People started specializing in what they do well and it provided us all sorts of advantages to do that. Specialization allowed the population to grow beyond what is feasible for lions, but something that is quite comfortable for house cats. I get Dr. Pepper even though I have no idea what's in it because someone else does. I have people who learn to fly Boeing passenger planes so I don't have to. I have people who choreograph showgirl dance numbers for me and others who make racy costumes for them.
There's a price I pay for all of that Dr. Pepper and international travel and scantily clad showgirls. I have to protect and respect the people who make them. So I do things like pay taxes and not shoot guns in the air on New Year's Eve and get vaccinated so I don't kill a bunch of them.
It's not as if we chose to create this world. We were born into it. Short of an imaginative mass genocide plan or interstellar travel, there's no going back from house cat to lion. And the genocide thing has been tried, but no one can win a land war in Asia.
So what do we house cats do? We live comfortably and enjoy our cat treats and we live as good citizens in the society that makes them for us. While we may dream of being lions, and it's a noble dream, we have to behave within the reality that we're house cats and sometimes do what's best for everyone. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
No, it isn't. I hate that analogy. Seatbelts are about driving which is a privilege not a right. There is a significant difference. I appreciate and understand the sentiment but I hate that analogy.
Originally Posted by IA_Chiefs_fan:
I mostly agree. Although I'll still be a good boy until everyone's had an opportunity to get their vaccine too. Then it's game on!
This is the correct and logical answer. Once the population as a whole has had the opportunity then it’s back to normal. People are craving it and need it financially, emotionally, and mentally. The bar is not a certain percentage vaccinated, it’s opportunity for it and for everyone to have had a chance. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
And ex-Facebook Exec yesterday said people who get the vaccine should get special masks to wear to let everyone know they got vaccinated. :-)
I thought within the injection is a microchip, which can be detected by cell phones, thus letting you access events and such, and whom to avoid.:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's another area where nuance in discussion would be helpful. I don't expect us to be anywhere near the level of restrictions that we have now by next fall. If vaccination rates are low, though, there might be restrictions on things like large events still. Time will tell.
Originally Posted by IA_Chiefs_fan:
I mostly agree. Although I'll still be a good boy until everyone's had an opportunity to get their vaccine too. Then it's game on!
Yeah, that's the next big question. How do we open back up, and what affects it? I think vaccination rates will certainly be a key factor. If everyone vaxxes up, the natural spread will drop to inconsequential level and we'll go back to wrestling strangers on the street. If the vaccination rates are low, it'll keep the natural spread going, and even with a highly effective virus people will still get the thing. So opening up big crowd events will be slowed or stopped.
I know there's technically a question remaining about whether a vaxxed person can still spread it. I'm assuming here that they won't, because it would be a bummer if they do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
I know there's technically a question remaining about whether a vaxxed person can still spread it. I'm assuming here that they won't, because it would be a bummer if they do.
My take on the idea that people can still be carriers after getting the vaccine is similar to my take on people getting COVID twice. Can it happen? Probably. But it would be pretty different than our previous experiences if it were true for more than fringe cases. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My take on the idea that people can still be carriers after getting the vaccine is similar to my take on people getting COVID twice. Can it happen? Probably. But it would be pretty different than our previous experiences if it were true for more than fringe cases.
But you're going to wear your mask because possibility vs. probability..... [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My take on the idea that people can still be carriers after getting the vaccine is similar to my take on people getting COVID twice. Can it happen? Probably. But it would be pretty different than our previous experiences if it were true for more than fringe cases.
Yeah, I've got to agree on that. That's the logical assumption. It never even occurred to me that a vaxxed spreader was possible until it started getting disccussed. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
Yeah, I've got to agree on that. That's the logical assumption. It never even occurred to me that a vaxxed spreader was possible until it started getting disccussed.
I guess, just to be clear, I would assume that the 5% who are unlucky enough to not be immune would be possible carriers. It's the that the other 95% could be spreading it all over the place that seems unlikely to me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
Thought it was common knowledge that we are roughtly 18 months from being back to "normal" whatever that is post Covid.
Dr. Siegel had a few choice words for Bill Gates regarding his take on prolonged lockdowns.
It's easy for someone who like Gates to tell everyone else to just lock down and stay home. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Dr. Siegel had a few choice words for Bill Gates regarding his take on prolonged lockdowns.
It's easy for someone who like Gates to tell everyone else to just lock down and stay home.
I took Gates comments to be about California being that extreme manner. Most of America is not that way now. There is 0 reason to believe we would have to be more stringent than we have been at any point up to this time now that vaccines are starting to roll out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
I took Gates comments to be about California being that extreme manner. Most of America is not that way now. There is 0 reason to believe we would have to be more stringent than we have been at any point up to this time now that vaccines are starting to roll out.
Except that there aren't enough vaccines for everyone and then the booster, deaths are an at all time high and it will take several months for the vaccines to start making a difference. [Reply]
A Women immigrant from Hungry is the genius behind mRNA. Who’s idea for using mRNA against virus’s cost her jobs at two universities. But, Who’s laughing now?
—————————————————————————
'Redemption': How a scientist's unwavering belief in mRNA gave the world a Covid-19 vaccine
Just because I'm tired of strictly thinking negative. It's amazing to think about all of the good that will come out of COVID-19. We should have some pretty amazing medical advancements and this is good training for if we have another much more dangerous pandemic. I'll be interested in a couple of years from now to see what has come from Covid. [Reply]
Remember our initial discussions on reproduction factors back in March. The vaccine doesn't have to prevent even the 95% of people who it is effective on from being carriers. As long as the threshold is greater than what is needed for herd immunity then, at best, only localized outbreaks would occur, but none of them would be large enough to initiate exponential growth. [Reply]
