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:
I know nothing really, but I have to imagine it's mostly the first one. I'd wonder if you could theoretically do even more doses and have it eventually create enough of an immune response to work, but that would be a lot of resources put toward 5% of people when herd immunity should theoretically do the trick eventually.
I've always implicitly assumed that was the cause, but I'm really curious why. If so, is there some way to predict it? It seems like the only way you'd know if you're unlucky is that you get the virus. I guess that would be true if it was a process or manufacturing error, too.
Wait, though. You could get a followup test to see if you've got antibodies, right? Not saying that's a practical thing to do for every American, but it's technically a way to do it, I would think. [Reply]
Good to see that perceptions of being vaccinated ticking up. If we can actually get 80% of people to do it, we should be in good shape.
BREAKING: More than eight in 10 Americans say they would receive the coronavirus vaccine, with 40% saying they would take it as soon as it’s available to them and 44% saying they would wait a bit before getting it, according to new @ABC News/Ipsos poll. https://t.co/8suNRYdfcl
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
I know nothing about this stuff, but it makes me curious. Of the people for whom the vaccination doesn't work, is it a genetic thing with them? Will it never work due to some reason that's biological?
Or is it that for some reason the injection didn't get administered properly (e.g., missed the vein or something), and a second injection will work?
Or could it be something else, like they got a vaccine that got left out of storage five minutes too long?
A and C are possible. B is not as it is an IM vaccine.
mRNA is a very fragile molecule, which is one of the reasons why you need such cold temperatures. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
A and C are possible. B is not as it is an IM vaccine.
mRNA is a very fragile molecule, which is one of the reasons why you need such cold temperatures.
What do you think is most likely or common? I'm not saying it's necessary if we have a high overall vaccination rate, but could an individual theoretically get tested afterwards and re-vaxx if his/her vaccine didn't take? [Reply]
Did I read or hear correctly that the Moderna vax is also possibly effective with patients actively fighting covid?
On another note my son (28) works for a small family owned company. The husband and wife (owners) last wednesday came down with fever/cough/nausea/aches and pains. My son beginning Sunday came down with the same. Today he said all the symptoms are gone except the dry cough. Owners are getting tested today and my son getting tested tomorrow. So far everybody just mildly sick. I had dinner with my son at our house last Monday, 6 days before his symptoms so I think I`ll be fine regardless. [Reply]
Originally Posted by sedated:
Apparently there is a new mutation of Covid that was discovered in southern England. I'm not too concerned about the effect on the vaccine, but wonder if it mutated (again) to be less severe.
From my understanding of virus mutations, the more a virus mutates, the more attenuated it becomes generally. This is because less severe strains of a virus from a symptom standpoint will be more apt to be spread as people won't be as inclined to stay home and isolate. More severe cases from a symptom standpoint will be more likely to isolate and therefor less likely to spread. Over time, the attenuated form will outcompete the non attenuated form for hosts, assuming of course, that antibodies for one protect from the other. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
I know nothing about this stuff, but it makes me curious. Of the people for whom the vaccination doesn't work, is it a genetic thing with them? Will it never work due to some reason that's biological?
Or is it that for some reason the injection didn't get administered properly (e.g., missed the vein or something), and a second injection will work?
Or could it be something else, like they got a vaccine that got left out of storage five minutes too long?
you're putting chemicals in your body they effect everyone differently. see alcohol. [Reply]
Why does the Pfizer vaccine have to be stored at incredibly cold temperatures while the Moderna can basically be put in the fridge? This has probably been discussed before but I'm curious. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
Why does the Pfizer vaccine have to be stored at incredibly cold temperatures while the Moderna can basically be put in the fridge? This has probably been discussed before but I'm curious.
IIRC, it's the lipid coat that allows the mRNA to transport that has to be kept that cold so not to degrade. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
Why does the Pfizer vaccine have to be stored at incredibly cold temperatures while the Moderna can basically be put in the fridge? This has probably been discussed before but I'm curious.
Originally Posted by O.city:
IIRC, it's the lipid coat that allows the mRNA to transport that has to be kept that cold so not to degrade.
Here's an interesting article I found if anyone else is/was curious. The article is super long so I'm just going to post the link to it.
Here’s why COVID-19 vaccines like Pfizer’s need to be kept so cold
On a personal note, I'm a bit annoyed with my companies response to the vaccine rollout. Nobody at our local branch has any clue as to what is going on. (Not particularly surprising as they have to await orders from corporate to do much of anything.) I'm not blaming them.
I actually got in contact with our corporate office last week and asked them what the companies plan was. I ended up on a big email chain with some of the big wigs in my organization, which was kinda neat. They confirmed for me that we fall within the 1a category, however beyond that they seemed to have no information. Not that they were willing to share with me anyway.
I understand there are a lot of moving parts in play here but having a plan in place seems like a good idea. [Reply]
I presume they let the Pfizer vaccine get to room/ambient temperature or close to it before injection. I wonder how long it "lasts" at said temperature. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
Why does the Pfizer vaccine have to be stored at incredibly cold temperatures while the Moderna can basically be put in the fridge? This has probably been discussed before but I'm curious.
I can't remember the specifics of it but I read an article that Pfizer is working on it for 2022. Something like putting a shell around the mRNA I think. Also, it's possible they don't need this extreme of cold. They have to test and see how long it lasts. I think this is just where they were sure it'd work to start.
Moderna had the same kind of recommendations until the Nov. announcement. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
What do you think is most likely or common? I'm not saying it's necessary if we have a high overall vaccination rate, but could an individual theoretically get tested afterwards and re-vaxx if his/her vaccine didn't take?
As you know, whenever we perform mass vaccination we generally rely on the underlying efficacy of the vaccine to suppress viral transmission through herd immunity instead of checking for effectiveness of the individual dose.
When they were approximating the immunogenicity of the vaccine, they compared it against a mean serum antibody concentration from the plasma of patients previously infected with COVID. While that is an interesting surrogate marker, we don't know if that actually proves anything clinically. I suppose that it's possible that you could give someone a booster if their antibody concentration was two SD below normal (just offering a rough example), but to truly know if that was effective you would need serial blood draws of the entire vaccinated population which could then be compared against future confirmed COVID infections. From there, an analysis of antibody levels might be instructive if you could establish that patients below X were more likely to contract COVID even after vaccination. This is all purely theoretical, and unfortunately medicine is rarely as linear as we would like. [Reply]
