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 Marcellus:
There is literally zero benefit to this. I have no idea where you guys get these ideas.
If the health department calls you and tells you were in close contact with an infected person you need to go get a test whether you are showing symptoms or not. This is basic stuff. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
There is literally zero benefit to this. I have no idea where you guys get these ideas.
Here you, Doc:
The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the HIV Medicine Association called for the “immediate reversal” of the update in a joint statement.
“It is essential that public health guidelines be rooted in the best available scientific evidence,” the two groups said. “Testing asymptomatic individuals who have been exposed to a person with COVID-19 remains a critical evidence-based strategy for containing the pandemic and reducing transmission.”
and
"I am concerned about the interpretation of these recommendations and worried it will give people the incorrect assumption that asymptomatic spread is not of great concern. In fact it is," Fauci added. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
If the health department calls you and tells you were in close contact with an infected person you need to go get a test whether you are showing symptoms or not. This is basic stuff. :-)
This is from 2009...contrast it in every aspect to today....seen anything different? I will help
Originally Posted by :
In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains.
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Testing asymptomatic people because of potential exposure has nothing to do with that, that's a totally different topic.
Mass testing and then contact tracing of positives is the only thing that would tell us about that and that has nothing to do with the CDC guideline change.
If asymptomatic people are spreading, we need to know who's positive even if not showing symptoms.
I'm skeptical they're really spreading it that much, but thats the idea behind mass testing. Gotta know where it's at. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Testing positive is not the same as testing for the ability to spread, right?
That's not even the point. Its not time effective nor useful to test people who have simple been "possibly exposed" and exhibit no symptom.
We have probably dealt with close to 100 close contact scenarios and the health departments did not test a single person unless they became symptomatic. This is across Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma from a state perspective and 5 or 6 county health departments.
By the time you wait long enough to definitely determine the test would be accurate the quarantine time will have expired and if you have been asymptomatic you don't need a test. At that point you may as well do an antibody test.
People went from bitching about a back log of testing to bitching about this stuff. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
This is from 2009...contrast it in every aspect to today....seen anything different? I will help
They probably should have continued to testing but then we are back to comparing H1N1 to Covid and covid blew past it in the first few weeks. There is no comparison. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
That's not even the point. Its not time effective nor useful to test people who have simple been "possibly exposed" and exhibit no symptom.
We have probably dealt with close to 100 close contact scenarios and the health departments did not test a single person unless they became symptomatic. This is across Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma from a state perspective and 5 or 6 county health departments.
By the time you wait long enough to definitely determine the test would be accurate the quarantine time will have expired and if you have been asymptomatic you don't need a test. At that point you may as well do an antibody test.
People went from bitching about a back log of testing to bitching about this stuff.
Oh I agree. The goal posts are moving fast enough to be confused with a game of musical chairs.
The fact is people need to start getting a grip that "cases" does not mean what we thought it meant 6 months ago. Particularly in my area. Cases are in "the red zone" yet fortunately for most and not so fortunate for the elderly is the death count has literally not changed in months in the age groups 69 and under.
So if I see the largest age group to get the virus in my area is 20-29 yet only one person in that group has died in 6 months there are multiple reasons why people won't and maybe even shouldn't waste their time getting tested.
The media and some others still want to equate cases to a death sentence. When that gets challenged then it goes to anecdotal evidence of possible residual effects. And round and around it goes, deaths-cases-residual effects-deaths-cases-residual effects. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
They probably should have continued to testing but then we are back to comparing H1N1 to Covid and covid blew past it in the first few weeks. There is no comparison.
Yeah I think you missed the entire point but you do you [Reply]
I think if they stopped testing asymptomatic people it would have little or no effect on stopping the spread. You could argue it could even help. When you do not know that asymptomatic people are even big players in the spread, eliminating them from the pool would help you guesstimate better the impact that they do have. Would better allow us to determine if this segment is really the bogeyman that many portray them to be. [Reply]
