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 suzzer99:
It's been clear from the beginning that a million or more deaths in the US are in play if we did nothing (.5% deadly * 40-70% infected). I threw out 350k at the beginning of this thread and got laughed at.
Even if the unknowable *true* death rate is .1% - that's still 161k people in the US at 50% infected, which would overload the ICU beds/ventilators if it happens in a short period of time. Not everyone dies - so multiply that 161k by a factor of several to get the total people needing intensive care. Once you overload the hospitals the death rate goes up dramatically.
Yeah I don't know, we are 2 months into this and maybe tomorrow we will hit 100 deaths with half coming from Washington nursing home. To reach those numbers you would have to have 500 + die a day. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
That's EXACTLY the problem. If your answer is 'stop the spread' then you're saying that we shut everything down until there's a vaccine. Because under that plan, there's no acquired immunity. So the moment you start the country back up, you're right back where you were on 3/1/20. The 'flatten the curve' movement is just thrown right at the window at that point.
It's exactly the "dig a trench and wait for air support" scenario that I believe is simply not viable. If the government tries to put the brakes on the nation for 12 months, there will be no government left to re-start. You'll have a genuine descent into anarchy.
With additional evidence suggesting a seasonal nature, you need to slow-play this into the warmer weather where transmission rates will be naturally slowed and the curve will flatten naturally. Trying to simply hold the water back as long as possible is just as likely to end in a scenario where the dam finally breaks in October and the outbreak re-starts at the beginning of the cold/flu season. Which would be truly catastrophic. Use where we are on the calendar to our advantage.
That being said, I think it's risky to try to use the UK to extrapolate results given their relatively small landmass and thus the increase probability of a true nationwide outbreak. Our major advantage in this remains geography. If we don't lean on that advantage (and every other advantage at our disposal), we're making a massive mistake.
I think there's a way out. China is going back to work in some cities. It has to start with testing. We have to test like crazy to keep it from spreading like wildfire again. S. Korea never even had to shut down all their restaurants. Japan isn't even having a huge problem (which I still think could be the masks).
We also need an isolation plan for people who do test positive (we may need to pay them unemployment insurance or something so there isn't a huge incentive to not get tested). China found that most of the spread happened in family clusters. People can't just go home and self-isolate unless they live alone or everyone in the house isolates. And maybe just try making everyone wear a mask in public when it gets cold again. But make sure we have enough masks (disposable surgical masks should be fine).
There are new treatments which look promising. And we can also ramp up the number of ICU beds and ventilators. Although if we need them that still means a ton of people dying.
I kinda wonder if it's going to be something like letting young(ish) people go back to work, making older people avoid gatherings and at risk places like gyms, and putting massive social pressure for young people not to spend time around their grandparents. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
I think there's a way out. China is going back to work in some cities. It has to start with testing. We have to test like crazy to keep it from spreading like wildfire again.
We also need an isolation plan for people who do test positive (we may need to pay them unemployment insurance or something so there isn't a huge incentive to not get tested). China found that most of the spread happened in family clusters. People can't just go home and self-isolate unless they live alone or everyone in the house isolates.
There are new treatments which look promising. And we can also ramp up the number of ICU beds and ventilators. Although if we need them that still means a ton of people dying.
I kinda wonder if it's going to be something like letting young(er) people go back to work, making older people stay indoors, and putting massive social pressure for young people not to spend time around their grandparents.
China also appears to be throwing journalists out. That's...very on-brand.
Yeah, they're going back to work - we'll see awfully soon what their infection rates do. I still don't understand how they'll have just 'stopped' the spread. That's not how this works. As soon as travel opens back up, aren't they in the exact same situation except their population of, what, 1.3 billion people now has an 'N' of 1.2 billion people? Their response stalled the immediate spread but to what long-term effect? And if it HAS somehow permanently stymied it...well then they know something that they aren't telling us, no?
I think your last paragraph is almost EXACTLY what we should probably be working towards. Right now, while we're still not exactly clear of the scope of the situation, we should continue to be reactive and focus the majority of our efforts on hot-spots to maintain their capacity for as long as we can within those areas. That'll save a lot of those lives.
And at the same time we work on something of a national action plan where we strongly encourage the elderly (and ultimately I'm drawing this line at 60, not 50) to stay home and avoid contact with the younger population for as long as possible. We allow early access to retirement plans (401Ks and the like) and waive penalties. We allow early admission into Medicare for those that elect to voluntarily leave the workforce. We take measures designed to incentivize the most imperiled among us to stay safe.
There are small course corrections we can make nationally with significant targeted changes we can make in local areas and among at-risk demographics that can have massive impacts. But we don't just go whipping the wheel back and forth because that's how you end up rolling down the highway. [Reply]
Originally Posted by wazu:
I think some people are overestimating what ventilators can do. So far it sounds like the majority of people who get put on ventilators don't end up surviving, even with a ventilator. Basically, if you're so sick you need one, your odds are already pretty low. Obviously they do still save some lives, and we want to have them available to save as many people as possible. But it seems to me that ensuring all other treatment options and supplies are available would be a wiser way to prioritize resources.
so we should be Italy even if we have the spare ventilators? Your old with and underlying condition, go over in the corner and die please. We are saving that ventilator for someone else? And who decides life and death?
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Again I ask you - what do you believe a 'national lockdown' is? A federally mandated, federally enforced edict from the government ordering you to stay in your homes
Do you think the federal government has police powers? Don't answer, I'll just tell you - they don't. The Constitution does not grant the Federal Government the right to patrol the streets enforcing measures for the public health. That is specifically reserved to the states and that order (or enforcement) cannot by law come from on high. In order for the federal government to actively involve itself, they effectively HAVE to declare martial law.
If you can find a mechanism to enforce a national shutdown WITHOUT the imposition of martial law, I'd like to hear it. Within the boundaries of our Constitution, the most the federal government can do is encourage states to do it on their own (though they could tie federal aid to it if they wanted). If they attempt to do more than that, they would essentially have to suspend the Constitution.
I’m Okay with closing businesses and or limiting hours. Businesses don’t have constitutional rights. They have a license to Operate from the state or city. Probably regulated in some way. Restricting citizens movements based on a “crisis” is not a good standard to adopt. Yes, this is now a crisis. I worry about someone in the future declaring a “crisis” and locking us down.
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
How does Russia only have 93 cases?
That is less than Colorado for a comparison.
there is no way they are reporting their real numbers. I’m sure it’s lower than the average country but we can’t trust anything out of Russia.
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
It's been clear from the beginning that a million or more deaths in the US are in play if we did nothing (.5% deadly * 40-70% infected). I threw out 350k at the beginning of this thread and got laughed at.
Even if the unknowable *true* death rate is .1% - that's still 161k people in the US at 50% infected, which would overload the ICU beds/ventilators if it happens in a short period of time. Not everyone dies - so multiply that 161k by a factor of several to get the total people needing intensive care. Once you overload the hospitals the death rate goes up dramatically.
if we don’t flatten that curve right now, people are going to die later. [Reply]
Interesting editorial by Fauci, Lane, and Redfield in the New England Journal of Medicine. Exerpt first. Link below.
Oh ... and before you guys start down-thumbing my ass into oblivion again, I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I am NOT advocating that everyone rush out and french kiss the first stranger or elderly person they see.
On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia, the currently reported case fatality rate is approximately 2%.4 In another article in the Journal, Guan et al.5 report mortality of 1.4% among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19; these patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity. If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.
PS: Stanford and the National Acadamy of Sciences recently released a statement (a press release thing I can't find online so far) stating this; Based on the results of trials in South Korea and China, Chloroquine has shown "favorable outcomes" in humans infected with coronavirus. The release continues: US CDC research shows that Chloroquine also has strong potential as a prophylactic measure against coronavirus in the lab.
Thought you would like to know. Stay smart and strong Planeteers.
Originally Posted by Strongside:
Well, my brother (the one who is sick and can't get tested) just got laid off.
Man that sucks.
I still have one as of today, but I don't think it'll last for long. Putting that into perspective, guess I should be fortunate to be healthy going into unemployment. Best of luck to him. [Reply]
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce announced Tuesday that not only is he matching teammate Tyreek Hill’s donation to Harvesters, he’s doubling it and also donating to Operation Breakthrough.
“I got your 6k and will raise you another 6k meals,” Kelce tweeted in response to Hill’s challenge.
Together, they will donate 18,000 meals to Harvesters to give to local families struggling to find food during the coronavirus outbreak.
Kelce also said he wants to make sure local children who rely on Operation Breakthrough have the food and supplies they need. He will donate all the food and supplies they need for the next 15 weeks “to keep it business as usual for the kids.”
Hill started the challenge on Twitter Monday.
“The COVID-19 outbreak is changing our daily lives,” Hill tweeted. “Today my foundation will be partnering with Harvesters to donate meals to families and youth who are now without their free breakfast and lunch programs.”
In his announcement, Hill also challenged teammates Patrick Mahomes, Demarcus Robinson, Gehrig Dieter, Tyrann Mathieu and Frank Clark.
Kelce was the first to respond.
Hill also said he is challenging all of Chiefs Kingdom to help in anyway they can. [Reply]
I still have one as of today, but I don't think it'll last for long. Putting that into perspective, guess I should be fortunate to be healthy going into unemployment. Best of luck to him.
my daughter, who is in sales, was talking to one of her customers yesterday and they told her they were contemplating laying everyone off and shuttering the business for now.
Now my daughter is all freaked out that if other customers start doing this, she may be out of a job. Had to tell her she couldn't spend her time worrying about it and just keep pressing forward. If it happens, it happens. Nothing she can do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by FAX:
Interesting editorial by Fauci, Lane, and Redfield in the New England Journal of Medicine. Exerpt first. Link below.
Oh ... and before you guys start down-thumbing my ass into oblivion again, I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I am NOT advocating that everyone rush out and french kiss the first stranger or elderly person they see.
On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia, the currently reported case fatality rate is approximately 2%.4 In another article in the Journal, Guan et al.5 report mortality of 1.4% among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19; these patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity. If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.
PS: Stanford and the National Acadamy of Sciences recently released a statement (a press release thing I can't find online so far) stating this; Based on the results of trials in South Korea and China, Chloroquine has shown "favorable outcomes" in humans infected with coronavirus. The release continues: US CDC research shows that Chloroquine also has strong potential as a prophylactic measure against coronavirus in the lab.
Thought you would like to know. Stay smart and strong Planeteers.
FAX
There's been a lot of good news about Chloroquine out there. Idk how long these trials take, but maybe we can hurry things along a bit since this drug has been around for 50 years. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RedRaider56:
my daughter, who is in sales, was talking to one of her customers yesterday and they told her they were contemplating laying everyone off and shuttering the business for now.
Now my daughter is all freaked out that if other customers start doing this, she may be out of a job. Had to tell her she couldn't spend her time worrying about it and just keep pressing forward. If it happens, it happens. Nothing she can do.
Yeah. I figure at this point I'll just keep my resume updated and if it happens officially I'll just keep working on my next IT cert until I'm employed again.
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
Yeah I don't know, we are 2 months into this and maybe tomorrow we will hit 100 deaths with half coming from Washington nursing home. To reach those numbers you would have to have 500 + die a day.
Unless something dramatically shifts to the bad in the next week, and considering the social distancing it shouldn't, we aren't going to see anything near all the crazy predictions. We haven't seen the super fast climb in deaths or new cases predicted just 10 days ago.
The whole idea of "millions" of deaths is based off 50% of the people getting it and 3% of them dying. We have already dropped down to 1.5% death rate on cases we know exist so its obviously lower if 80% of people show very little sign of illness even if they contract it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Unless something dramatically shifts to the bad in the next week, and considering the social distancing it shouldn't, we aren't going to see anything near all the crazy predictions. We haven't seen the super fast climb in deaths or new cases predicted just 10 days ago.
The whole idea of "millions" of deaths is based off 50% of the people getting it and 3% of them dying. We have already dropped down to 1.5% death rate on cases we know exist so its obviously lower if 80% of people show very little sign of illness even if they contract it.
I understand this argument - but then why are people saying we're right on track with where Italy was? [Reply]