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 R Clark:
Damn I just got the first one today, thought I was really doing something right lol . I hope your daughter is alright.
Well the vaccine wouldn't have had time to take effect but hopefully it prevents her from having much of a case.
That makes all 3 of my kids have now tested positive at some point. They are all pretty young young (28, 23, and 19) so its been no biggie to this point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
We should make a lunch bet, because I'd guess closer to 90 percent when all is said and done. I'm hopeful that most people will do the logic and realize that the deaths and illnesses are down because of the vaccine and so they'll want to be part of that.
Just no chance. We already are at about 10% with confirmed infections. In that group perhaps 2-3% will get it? So the maximum is already about 90%. Behavioral psychology just tells me that there is a window for getting as many people to do it as possible and it’s directly correlated to the perceived threat, which will be greatly reduced by early summer.
So the question becomes is everyone, those who make and enforce rules, going to accept that 50% and just let everyone get on with returning to normal? [Reply]
If the vaccines were less effective, there would be a stronger argument and a stronger push for doing things like requiring proof of vaccination in order to fly once everyone has had a chance to get vaccinated.
My guess is it will probably only be required for international flights.
I'm guessing around a 70% vaccination rate. Certainly not 90. If it turns out to only be 50% it wouldn't shock me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
About 50% of the staff at the local nursing home doesn't want to get the vaccine ,so I think general population we might get lucky to get flu shot numbers 40%, I figure 35% because of the new technology people will be unsure of.
The staff at the local nursing home probably have a combined IQ of 66. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Every survey I have seen shows about 33 percent will not get vaccinated.
Honestly, doesn't matter. If you're at risk you get your chance then we all move on.
I've been a mask supporter and in favor of restrictions the entire time. But yeah, one everyone who wants the vaccine has had the chance to get it, it's game on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I've been a mask supporter and in favor of restrictions the entire time. But yeah, one everyone who wants the vaccine has had the chance to get it, it's game on.
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Every survey I have seen shows about 33 percent will not get vaccinated.
Honestly, doesn't matter. If you're at risk you get your chance then we all move on.
Maybe I'll be surprised, but I think there's a big difference between saying you'll turn down the vaccine in theory and actually saying no when you get the call. I think a lot of people right now are posturing for their own reasons, but when the rubber hits the road they'll get it.
I know it's me-search instead of research, but I know people in rural areas who are telling me that they won't get vaccinated, and it's 100 percent that they will. I know these people, and they'll get it. They just feel like they're supposed to say no at the moment. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
The staff at the local nursing home probably have a combined IQ of 66.
Hospital I'm at was probably at about 60% that took it. We have had the opportunity twice to get it and twice some turned it down. The dividing line was age. Around 40 n under majority declined. Since it didn't or least with their own eyes they seen the vast majority of people that got COVID were in the 60 plus age range they didn't see a need to get it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by loochy: :-) WTF are you smoking? Have you been to any rural areas? Those people are NOT on board.
LOL, no shit. Take a visit to any small town across the midwest. The overwhelming majority are taking zero precautions. It's a drastic difference compared to the cities. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
LOL, no shit. Take a visit to any small town across the midwest. The overwhelming majority are taking zero precautions. It's a drastic difference compared to the cities.
Yeah, for sure. But I dont think there are a ton of anti vaxxers. A lot are just ambivalent. If it means getting kids back into schools, church, getting their neighbors restaurant going again, etc... I don't think you're selling a lot of people in these areas that they need it, but you can probably sell plenty of them on just doing it to get it over with. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Yeah, for sure. But I dont think there are a ton of anti vaxxers. A lot are just ambivalent. If it means getting kids back into schools, church, getting their neighbors restaurant going again, etc... I don't think you're selling a lot of people in these areas that they need it, but you can probably sell plenty of them on just doing it to get it over with.
As someone who grew up in one of those small midwest towns, and still has all family still living in small midwest towns, I'm going to disagree. I have family working in a small town hospital, convinced that the vaccine is a Bill Gates death cocktail. You're not selling some of these people no matter what. [Reply]
