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 'Hamas' Jenkins:
Because. it. takes. time. to. review. data.
The US is going to have access to both vaccines faster than the EU. The US will be a few days behind the UK only for the Pfizer vaccine only. Demand still far outpaces supply, which is why there is a tiered distribution schedule. If you'd like to find articles critical of the speed of the UK's approval, you won't have a problem, trust me.
You either don't understand the process, or you're just coming up with reasons to complain. If someone told you in April that the vaccine would be available for high-risk groups on December 16th, but one other country may have it on December 12th, would you really have complained? I mean, for ****'s sake.
Once again you offer no real answer other than "it takes time", etc. Your assumptions otherwise are again you being a dick. I am asking why the UK says it's okay to start but we aren't.
You obviously don't have an answer so whatever. Oh wait, I get it it takes time". But yet we can revert to articles criticizing the UK yet you tout how we are just days behind them.
Whatever, Hamas. I was not trying to bitch. I was trying to understand why we are waiting when the UK isn't. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
2,614 reported deaths yesterday. Damn.
Less shocking of a "daily" total when you take into account the significant backlog of info (cases and deaths) that was not recorded last week that is getting reported now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kgrund:
Less shocking of a "daily" total when you take into account the significant backlog of info (cases and deaths) that was not recorded last week that is getting reported now.
I haven't heard that, other than something like 20 states didn't report at all on Thanksgiving day. [Reply]
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is unnecessarily dragging its feet on reviewing candidates for a coronavirus vaccine, Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marty Makary told "Bill Hemmer Reports" Monday.
"The country has taken tremendous sacrifices," Makary told host Bill Hemmer. "We are waiting for this lifesaving vaccine, and the FDA got the [Pfizer] application on Nov. 22 and the Moderna one today. Why are they waiting three weeks? Why are they scheduling a review for Dec. 10?
"The review committee is not interviewing subjects and volunteers, they're not looking under a microscope at the cells or the virus, they are simply reading a piece of paper with the numbers," Makary added. "We have an Internet now. They can get those numbers in real time."
Massachusetts-based Moderna announced earlier Monday that it would apply to the FDA for an emergency use authorization after its vaccine candidate was demonstrated to be 94.1% effective against COVID-19 in human trials.
The FDA has scheduled a Dec. 10 meeting of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee to discuss Pfizer's request for emergency use authorization (EUA) of its vaccine candidate. It was not immediately clear whether Moderna's request would be considered at the same meeting or a separate meeting.
"The FDA has been too bureaucratic, taking too much time," Makary charged. "And I don't know if they're scheduling around vacation times and tee times of the reviewers, but they should turn the application around in 24 hours."
Makary added that while the Trump administration has overseen "Operation Warp Speed" to develop a vaccine, the FDA has been engaged in "Operation Turtle Speed."
"The reason is, very simply, Bill, is that the FDA was designed to be slow," he explained to Hemmer. "The military was designed to respond quickly. The FDA was designed to take their good old time and review things in the name of safety and independence.
"Well, if you talk to people there, they've clearly walled off any of the [political] appointees ... It's the career staff there that have completely walled off anyone else and they're taking their good old time." [Reply]
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is unnecessarily dragging its feet on reviewing candidates for a coronavirus vaccine, Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marty Makary told "Bill Hemmer Reports" Monday.
"The country has taken tremendous sacrifices," Makary told host Bill Hemmer. "We are waiting for this lifesaving vaccine, and the FDA got the [Pfizer] application on Nov. 22 and the Moderna one today. Why are they waiting three weeks? Why are they scheduling a review for Dec. 10?
"The review committee is not interviewing subjects and volunteers, they're not looking under a microscope at the cells or the virus, they are simply reading a piece of paper with the numbers," Makary added. "We have an Internet now. They can get those numbers in real time."
Massachusetts-based Moderna announced earlier Monday that it would apply to the FDA for an emergency use authorization after its vaccine candidate was demonstrated to be 94.1% effective against COVID-19 in human trials.
The FDA has scheduled a Dec. 10 meeting of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee to discuss Pfizer's request for emergency use authorization (EUA) of its vaccine candidate. It was not immediately clear whether Moderna's request would be considered at the same meeting or a separate meeting.
"The FDA has been too bureaucratic, taking too much time," Makary charged. "And I don't know if they're scheduling around vacation times and tee times of the reviewers, but they should turn the application around in 24 hours."
Makary added that while the Trump administration has overseen "Operation Warp Speed" to develop a vaccine, the FDA has been engaged in "Operation Turtle Speed."
"The reason is, very simply, Bill, is that the FDA was designed to be slow," he explained to Hemmer. "The military was designed to respond quickly. The FDA was designed to take their good old time and review things in the name of safety and independence.
"Well, if you talk to people there, they've clearly walled off any of the [political] appointees ... It's the career staff there that have completely walled off anyone else and they're taking their good old time."
I heard an interview that said the recommendations on who should get the vaccine first will be just that: recommendations. That it will be up to individual states to determine who gets their allocated doses.
