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 Donger:
You know that is not correct, so why are you saying it again?
Recently published data from a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finds that 70.6% of COVID-19-positive patients report “always” wearing a mask, 14.4% report “often” wearing a mask, and 3.9% report “never” wearing a mask (See Table: Reported use of cloth face covering or mask 14 days before illness onset.).
The study compared case patients who tested positive (154) and control patients who tested negative (160). [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
In an attempt to steer the conversation in another direction...
My company has all of us back in the office as of this week. We're all required to wear masks, etc.
I share a rather large office with one other co-worker.
Any precautions we can take to help mitigate the possible spread? We have a giant window, but it doesn't open. I have a fan running in an attempt to keep air moving around. Any other ideas?
Here, in my area, I'm certainly not. I deal with recovering addicts on a daily basis.
I know plenty of "rugged individualists" here and almost all of them are wearing masks, even if they don't agree with it. Around here, we actually do things that might benefit someone other than ourselves, even if it's an incovenience to us personally. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Recently published data from a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) finds that 70.6% of COVID-19-positive patients report “always” wearing a mask, 14.4% report “often” wearing a mask, and 3.9% report “never” wearing a mask (See Table: Reported use of cloth face covering or mask 14 days before illness onset.).
The study compared case patients who tested positive (154) and control patients who tested negative (160).
Please stop doing it:
A recent @CDCMMWR looking at exposures among people w/ and w/o #COVID19 also assessed rates of mask use. However, the interpretation that more mask-wearers are getting infected compared to non-mask wearers is incorrect. https://t.co/8PtI7W6KG5
Originally Posted by TLO:
In an attempt to steer the conversation in another direction...
My company has all of us back in the office as of this week. We're all required to wear masks, etc.
I share a rather large office with one other co-worker.
Any precautions we can take to help mitigate the possible spread? We have a giant window, but it doesn't open. I have a fan running in an attempt to keep air moving around. Any other ideas?
They won't allow you to continue to work from home? [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
I lived around these people most of my life so it doesn't surprise me. They think you are infringing on their freedoms and they get that message from the top. They just can't wrap their head around the fact that it is not so much that they can get it (which we obviously don't want) but them getting it and then spreading it to 4-5 other people, and they spread it to 4-5 people and on and on. They want to make it all about them but this isn't just affecting them.
I think I've mentioned this before, but I really believe that much of the reason for resistance - whether it's stated as political or lack of risk or whatever - is rooted in a simple resistance to change. A large proportion of people absolutely hate change of any type. It's logical and I think we're all that way to some extent. If you like your life in general, you don't want it to change. But sometimes we have to change and there's a pretty big subset of people who just can't handle it.
As a case in point, one of my hometown friends (rural area) owns a small restaurant. Her position on masks is that "it should be a choice. If you want to wear it, fine. If I don't, fine. Don't tell me what to do."
Well, first off, that's not how a pandemic works, but let's set that aside.
This is a nice, law-abiding person. I have nothing bad to say about her in terms of intelligence or morals or ethics. But I hear her say that, and I think, "WTF? You have health inspectors come into your restaurant regularly to ensure that you're following the law to protect others. You charge sales taxes and pass them on to the government. You pay to license your car You follow all sorts of societal rules and have no issue with them. So why is wearing a mask different than that?"
The only thing I can see is that she grew up doing all of those other things. She never had to adopt them because they were always the system. Now something new has entered the system and it disrupts her normalcy. She doesn't like it.
I really think that a major strength of America is that we as a country have change built into our society. But it also causes stress because we as people tend to dislike change. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
Please stop doing it:
A recent @CDCMMWR looking at exposures among people w/ and w/o #COVID19 also assessed rates of mask use. However, the interpretation that more mask-wearers are getting infected compared to non-mask wearers is incorrect. https://t.co/8PtI7W6KG5
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Ask your government. But the fact is, it is what it is. Why isn't really relevant at this point.
It's a privilege because the exercise of that privilege requires a certain competency to be done in a manner that doesn't cause undue harm to others. My point is that one person's freedom and rights stop when the exercise of that freedom restricts the freedom of another. For example, it doesn't bother me if someone not wearing a mask gets COVID and they are fine with it. Great for them. It does bother me when someone refuses to wear a mask when it might help reduce the spread of something that might kill someone with the right risk factors.
When the impact of a choice goes beyond impacts to your own person, it's not a matter of personal freedom anymore. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
the mask\anti-mask argument is old.
There are people that won't wear a mask for various reason, mostly political.
There are people who swear by masks because they have to feel safe even if they may not be as safe as they feel.
Fair enough.
My problem is when you hear things like "you wear the mask to protect others from you, not you from others. Then you hear "well, it also protects you from others" which ironically negates the former to a degree.
Then the real fun starts.
85% of cases were people who wore masks most or all of the time. But how can that be? They wore masks!
You didn't wear them right.
You wore them but touched them.
You wore the wrong kind.
It's a convenient excuse to just blame the lack of masks when the reality is more people across the globe are wearing masks now than they were 5 months ago and we have a huge surge in cases.
Might be more to it than just masks.
What that study doesn't show is how many people who were wearing masks were exposed to the virus and did NOT get infected. Nobody is claiming that masks work 100% of the time.
In how many fatal car accidents were the victims wearing a seatbelt? It's not a good metric because it doesn't take into account the other accidents where the seatbelt prevented a death. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
I think I've mentioned this before, but I really believe that much of the reason for resistance - whether it's stated as political or lack of risk or whatever - is rooted in a simple resistance to change. A large proportion of people absolutely hate change of any type. It's logical and I think we're all that way to some extent. If you like your life in general, you don't want it to change. But sometimes we have to change and there's a pretty big subset of people who just can't handle it.
As a case in point, one of my hometown friends (rural area) owns a small restaurant. Her position on masks is that "it should be a choice. If you want to wear it, fine. If I don't, fine. Don't tell me what to do."
Well, first off, that's not how a pandemic works, but let's set that aside.
This is a nice, law-abiding person. I have nothing bad to say about her in terms of intelligence or morals or ethics. But I hear her say that, and I think, "WTF? You have health inspectors come into your restaurant regularly to ensure that you're following the law to protect others. You charge sales taxes and pass them on to the government. You pay to license your car You follow all sorts of societal rules and have no issue with them. So why is wearing a mask different than that?"
The only thing I can see is that she grew up doing all of those other things. She never had to adopt them because they were always the system. Now something new has entered the system and it disrupts her normalcy. She doesn't like it.
I really think that a major strength of America is that we as a country have change built into our society. But it also causes stress because we as people tend to dislike change.
I remember your post about that and I responded that yes I agree with that mostly but some of it is definitely political. That is all I can say here lol.
In regards to your friend, yeah that is pretty typical here. I stopped trying to figure out why people oppose basic public health measures. And I want to be clear if for example the doctor's office mandates masks they will wear them or get kicked out but if it is half assed like Walmart's policy is then they won't. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Outside of the tone, which aspects of his post do you disagree with?
Mask usage is lower in rural areas than urban areas.
People in rural areas are less likely to believe that COVID is a problem at all.
Rural areas are being hit disproportionately hard by COVID in the past month.
Educational attainment is much lower in rural areas than in urban areas.
I've seen multiple viral posts like this from nurses in N and S Dakota and Iowa. By contrast anyone who participates in this thread is much much higher info. - they at least know the whole thing isn't a giant hoax. Well almost all. [Reply]
"This in no way means that Doering’s account is untrue. But it provides, at minimum, some important context that was completely absent from the CNN interview and from all the media amplification that followed. Little or no effort was made to assess the scope of the problem that Doering so memorably described. How many Covid-19 patients in South Dakota are really so blinkered by disinformation that they're enraged at their caregivers and, in their final moments on earth, still dispute what’s happening? No one bothered to find out.
...
In July we heard reports of rampant “Covid parties.” One version of this story had college students in Tuscaloosa hosting parties with infected guests, and then betting on who else would catch the virus. Another took the form of a second-hand account from a nurse in San Antonio. A 30-year-old patient was said to have admitted just before he died that he’d gotten sick by going to a Covid party. “I thought it was a hoax,” he allegedly told the nurse, “but it’s not.”
As WIRED’s Gilad Edelman reported at the time, none of these accounts held up to further scrutiny—yet each had been picked up from its original source and then amplified by larger publications that added little or no additional reporting. There’s good reason for these stories to be passed along, Edelman wrote. The hospital administrator who first went public with the story of the last-breath Covid-party confession is “trying desperately to get the American public to take the coronavirus seriously. If she hears a perfect cautionary tale, it isn’t necessarily her responsibility to investigate whether it’s too perfect before passing it along. It is, however, precisely the job of reporters.”
I've seen multiple viral posts like this from nurses in N and S Dakota and Iowa. By contrast anyone who participates in this thread is much much higher info. - they at least know the whole thing isn't a giant hoax. Well almost all.
