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 Lprechaun:
The risk of the vaccine complications at the moment far outweigh the risk of the virus.
What? :-)
I think you need to look again. The vaccine is not killing people, nor is it leaving them with permanent lesions on their lungs and diminished lung function. It is not enlarging hearts. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
What? :-)
I think you need to look again. The vaccine is not killing people, nor is it leaving them with permanent lesions on their lungs and diminished lung function. It is not enlarging hearts.
I dont mean in general, I mean for me personally. At the end of the day I think it's a personal choice. As much as I have personally been around those with it, doctors who worked in the covid wards and even sleeping in the same bed as my wife who had it, I personally see no reason for me to take the risk, as minimal as they may be, for something that hasnt even given me the sniffles. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
I don't mean in general, I mean for me personally. At the end of the day, I think it's a personal choice. As much as I have personally been around those with it, doctors who worked in the covid wards and even sleeping in the same bed as my wife who had it, I personally see no reason for me to take the risk, as minimal as they may be, for something that hasn't even given me the sniffles.
I remember a similar thought by my father with another vaccine.
He had raised 7 children through public schools and all the "diseases", flu, and cold that they brought home and he had never had more than mild reactions even when those around him had suffered from horribly high fever and all that stuff. Then he actually got a strong/bad case of the flu and was hospitalized for almost 2 weeks and he truly thought he was going to die in that hospital bed. He has been taking the flu vaccine ever since. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
I dont mean in general, I mean for me personally. At the end of the day I think it's a personal choice. As much as I have personally been around those with it, doctors who worked in the covid wards and even sleeping in the same bed as my wife who had it, I personally see no reason for me to take the risk, as minimal as they may be, for something that hasnt even given me the sniffles.
Right. You are waiting for it to give you lung lesions and then you will take the vaccine? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
I remember a similar thought by my father with another vaccine.
He had raised 7 children through public schools and all the "diseases", flu, and cold that they brought home and he had never had more than mild reactions even when those around him had suffered from horribly high fever and all that stuff. Then he actually got a strong/bad case of the flu and was hospitalized for almost 2 weeks and he truly thought he was going to die in that hospital bed. He has been taking the flu vaccine ever since.
Never had one of those either. I think the last shot I had was a tetanus shot when I was 16. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
Never had one of those either. I think the last shot I had was a tetanus shot when I was 16.
Hey man, you do you and that is great. It is your right and choice. I wish you all the best. I just hope that choice doesn't come with a consequence that you cannot live with. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
Hey man, you do you and that is great. It is your right and choice. I wish you all the best. I just hope that choice doesn't come with a consequence that you cannot live with.
And that's exactly it, we should all wish everyone the best regardless of the choice they make. If you feel strongly one way or the other you do that. In the same vein you wish the best for me I hope the best for anyone vaccinated that they dont have long term issues. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan:
Right. You are waiting for it to give you lung lesions and then you will take the vaccine?
I wont take it even if they said I had it. IF something happens to me there is no recourse. That's the main thing that worries me. There is too many IFs. What I KNOW is that I have been exposed a lot and never had a single symptom. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
As soon as they say I can sue if something happens to me from taking the vaccine i will consider getting it.
Until then I'm not coming anywhere near that vaccine.
I have a responsibility to my family to be able to provide for them.
The risk of the vaccine complications at the moment far outweigh the risk of the virus.
I also dont discourage anyone from taking it if they want. It's a terrible pandemic for some, others are hardly affected.
It affected everyone differently and not just by becoming ill or not.
guy died near here Tuesday who said same thing....
his responsibility to his family didnt override his decision to not vax. His 3 daughters will grow up with no dad.
pretty fucked up to risk your kids future with no parent
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan:
guy died near here Tuesday who said same thing....
his responsibility to his family didnt override his decision to not vax. His 3 daughters will grow up with no dad.
pretty ****ed up to risk your kids future with no parent
but hey
its about you....not your family
Sucks for his kids. I dont have kids and my wife views the vaccine as I do. Our decision, our risk. Just like the risk with taking it. It's your decision to weigh that risk and decide for yourself. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
I wont take it even if they said I had it. IF something happens to me there is no recourse. That's the main thing that worries me. There is too many IFs. What I KNOW is that I have been exposed a lot and never had a single symptom.
You won't take the vaccine because there's no recourse if you take the vaccine and it causes serious health issues. So then, what recourse do you have if you get COVID and it causes serious health issues or worse? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
Sucks for his kids. I dont have kids and my wife views the vaccine as I do. Our decision, our risk. Just like the risk with taking it. It's your decision to weigh that risk and decide for yourself.
Current culture likes to parent each other.
The shame game is in full force.
30-40k die every year from the flu. I guess we accept certain fatalities.
Do what you think is best for you and your family, just like everything else. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lprechaun:
Sucks for his kids. I dont have kids and my wife views the vaccine as I do. Our decision, our risk. Just like the risk with taking it. It's your decision to weigh that risk and decide for yourself.
It is just not your risk alone you realize that right? You may get Covid and are ok but you will be spreading it to 5-10 others that could possibly die from it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
It is just not your risk alone you realize that right? You may get Covid and are ok but you will be spreading it to 5-10 others that could possibly die from it.
Same thing can be said about speeding/tailgating on the highway.
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I dont think we know that to be certain. It makes sense to a degree but if we are going to follow science we best stick to following actual science.
The fact that vaccinated people might be walking around with no symptoms due to vaccination but still spreading it could play a big factor in this.
We were sold the idea that vaccination would stop spread and frankly that may not be true. It should lessen severity for certain.
I agree that we need to continue studying it, but from what I've read so far, the conclusion is that vaccinated people are less likely to spread it and it's less likely to be serious when they do. So unless we learn something that reverses this, I'm going to trust the existing studies and assume that unvaccinated people are the main culprit.
Evidence demonstrates that the authorized COVID-19 vaccines are both efficacious and effective against symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, including severe forms of the disease. In addition, a growing body of evidence suggests that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission. Substantial reductions in SARS-CoV-2 infections (both symptomatic and asymptomatic) will reduce overall levels of disease, and therefore, viral transmission in the United States. However, investigations are ongoing to assess further the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on transmission.
Can fully vaccinated people still transmit the virus to others, including other vaccinated people? While it is possible, Dr. Cardona says that the ability to transmit COVID-19 may occur at a lower rate. She adds that this could also be a reality for people who don’t have a good immune response to vaccines. [Reply]
