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.”
this last Saturday the wife and I were at the mall to pick up a few things and people watch a bit. We obviously both had our masks on (and gloves--that shit gets sweaty, son) and did a quick social experiment.
I counted unmasked OR those with the nose uncovered.
She counted properly masked people.
yeah, I know. I'm in a weird period of life where I promote science in my family as much as possible and use it as a chance to joke with my wife about hard vs soft science (she has a psych ba, I have a genetics phd).
results:
(over) 300 (stopped counting and nerd me did some adjustments to correct for proper sampling) weren't masked or masked properly. we counted 300 for the official count.
55 were masked.
84.5% of people at the columbia mall (generally a somewhat liberal place) weren't masked.
15.5 masked.
I wanna do this again with gloves.
I also (I'm out of that part of academia, so if anyone wants to steal this idea and write an NIH grant, go for it) want to do the same with the following...
1) same experiment with gloves. gloves vs nongloved
2) count different sections of the mall. some have more 'upscale' clientele, some not so much. are there regional differences even in a mall?
3) if POSSIBLE... figure out (aka we'd have to do contact tracing) whether more people in study 2's cohorts got covid more readily in certain sections of the mall vs others... yeah, this one would be hard
4) do same study at a wal-mart.
5) hell, do the same study at the more affluent part of town wal-mart.
yeah, I'm way ahead of myself and I'll never do it likely but... there are some interesting scientific questions to answer. [Reply]
before cdcox, kcdan or hamas clapback lol, I'ma say that yeah... there are a million variables and we'd have to do several samplings and have different people collecting data. yeah. I know. there's a reason I'm not actually going to do anything to actually try to make this a publishable paper, just an interesting thought experiment. [Reply]
I live in a county that has a total of 7 cases. Theres been probably about 10% mask wearers since the beginning in any given location unless admittance required a mask (theres only a couple stores in the area that are requiring a mask).
Back at the end of march, the ceo of the hospital gave out a dire warning about how widespread it was despite there only being a single confirmed case. 3 months later and we only have 6 more cases. 1 of those the person never actually tested positive and 2 others were people who worked in nursing homes in other counties. [Reply]
Phase 4 – Revitalization: The rate of infection among those surveillance tested and the number of patients admitted to the hospital continues to decline. Gatherings of 50 people or fewer are allowed, restaurants and bars reopen, travel resumes, child care and schools reopen under guidance from the Illinois Department of Public Health. Face coverings and social distancing are the norm. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Ebolapox:
I'd say it's obvious, wear the damned mask but...
this last Saturday the wife and I were at the mall to pick up a few things and people watch a bit. We obviously both had our masks on (and gloves--that shit gets sweaty, son) and did a quick social experiment.
I counted unmasked OR those with the nose uncovered.
She counted properly masked people.
yeah, I know. I'm in a weird period of life where I promote science in my family as much as possible and use it as a chance to joke with my wife about hard vs soft science (she has a psych ba, I have a genetics phd).
results:
(over) 300 (stopped counting and nerd me did some adjustments to correct for proper sampling) weren't masked or masked properly. we counted 300 for the official count.
55 were masked.
84.5% of people at the columbia mall (generally a somewhat liberal place) weren't masked.
15.5 masked.
I wanna do this again with gloves.
I also (I'm out of that part of academia, so if anyone wants to steal this idea and write an NIH grant, go for it) want to do the same with the following...
1) same experiment with gloves. gloves vs nongloved
2) count different sections of the mall. some have more 'upscale' clientele, some not so much. are there regional differences even in a mall?
3) if POSSIBLE... figure out (aka we'd have to do contact tracing) whether more people in study 2's cohorts got covid more readily in certain sections of the mall vs others... yeah, this one would be hard
4) do same study at a wal-mart.
5) hell, do the same study at the more affluent part of town wal-mart.
yeah, I'm way ahead of myself and I'll never do it likely but... there are some interesting scientific questions to answer.
We don't recommend wearing gloves, washing your hands is more effective, most people don't know how to remove them properly without contaminating themselves and also tend to be more liberal touching things and contaminating the environment. People tend to was their hands more when not wearing gloves. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
We don't recommend wearing gloves, washing your hands is more effective, most people don't know how to remove them properly without contaminating themselves and also tend to be more liberal touching things and contaminating the environment. People tend to was their hands more when not wearing gloves.
I say this with utmost sincerity... how many people do you think actually wash their hands properly while we AREN'T in a pandemic?
how many people DO wash properly in a pandemic? I've worked in BSL-3 labs, so I know how to disrobe properly and take off gloves correctly. you're right, not all do.
but most rarely wash their hands, and if they do, not properly. we don't need a surgical scrub but what I've seen people do in my lifetime and recently (**anecdotal, I know**) tell me that gloves would help more than anything. [Reply]
