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.”
There certainly aren't any easy answers. I'm, personally, a lot more optimistic that we'll have a vaccine far earlier than 18-24 months, but it's certainly not guaranteed.
I’ve watched in depth videos and read journals on the work being done on the vaccine that I only understand every 5th word and would put most people to sleep, and I’m 99% certain that even if we don’t have a 100% effective vaccine by years end, we will have a vaccine going to health care professionals that will both be safe and effective by years end. That vaccine may later need boosters or another vaccine, but the medical professionals I’ve researched are very bullish on effective vaccine prospects. The one place that continues to throw shade towards that are the Chinese researchers. The South Korea finding that the virus rna has a 3 month half life and that the people testing positive later were because of dead virus rna was HUGE news that didn’t get a ton of play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Oh, I'm not saying where we'll be death wise. But as this paper said, it woudl significantly slow the spread and accompanied with common sense stuff maybe it woudl be enough.
Yeah, I suppose maybe the logic is something like this (numbers mostly just made up):
-No restrictions of any sort, everything is normal = 1.5 million people dead by mid-2021
-Restrictions on concerts, sporting events, and conventions only = 400k people dead by mid-2021
-Full lockdown like we've had in the past month = 300k people dead by 2021
So the gist is that we'll get MOST of the benefit just by restricting the major sources of spread and that the restrictions on all of the smaller things only provide a small, incremental benefit. [Reply]
I have what might be a stupid question, but oh well. We keep talking about herd immunity and that it is a way to eradicate COVID-19. Is there an example of a disease that we reached herd immunity without the use of vaccines? Hell we don't even know for sure that you cant become reinfected. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Frankly, I wish more people would just get over it and argue in those terms. It's the "lives are priceless" BS that I don't really think is productive.
While it's harsh, those are the kinds of decisions we're really talking about here, and I wish we could just be more clear about it.
For the record, I personally don't think I'm willing to throw up my hands and accept that level of death, but I don't think you're a bad person for suggesting that it wouldn't be the end of the world.
This is a good take and I agree 100% with it.
How do you juggle not wanting large swaths of people to lose their lives with trying to make sure the country remains solvent? As you said, there are no easy answers as of right now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Are you OK with that if we end up with 1.5 million deaths? Not saying it'll happen, but it's well within the range of possibilities.
It could end up being our normal having to deal with 200-500k deaths a year , just didn’t want it to be plan a [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Frankly, I wish more people would just get over it and argue in those terms. It's the "lives are priceless" BS that I don't really think is productive.
While it's harsh, those are the kinds of decisions we're really talking about here, and I wish we could just be more clear about it.
For the record, I personally don't think I'm willing to throw up my hands and accept that level of death, but I don't think you're a bad person for suggesting that it wouldn't be the end of the world.
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Yeah, I suppose maybe the logic is something like this (numbers mostly just made up):
-No restrictions of any sort, everything is normal = 1.5 million people dead by mid-2021
-Restrictions on concerts, sporting events, and conventions only = 400k people dead by mid-2021
-Full lockdown like we've had in the past month = 300k people dead by 2021
So the gist is that we'll get MOST of the benefit just by restricting the major sources of spread and that the restrictions on all of the smaller things only provide a small, incremental benefit.
Could be. I've had 3 cups of coffee this morning and have been reading so i'm fried but that could make sense.
If in fact the "percent immunity" were in the 20's or 30's, that could explain NYC slow curve and growth or it could be the lock down. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
I have what might be a stupid question, but oh well. We keep talking about herd immunity and that it is a way to eradicate COVID-19. Is there an example of a disease that we reached herd immunity without the use of vaccines? Hell we don't even know for sure that you cant become reinfected.
It's mostly been done with the assistance of vaccines as far as I know. But we haven't had anything quite this virulent either. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dlphg9:
I have what might be a stupid question, but oh well. We keep talking about herd immunity and that it is a way to eradicate COVID-19. Is there an example of a disease that we reached herd immunity without the use of vaccines? Hell we don't even know for sure that you cant become reinfected.
H1N1 original strain. Anything before the advent of vaccines etc. Alot of things we have gotten to that point with viruses that weren't worth the amount of cost to put into vaccine development. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lewdog:
All the asymptomatic Petri dish children running around sharing it and taking it home to their parents.
Wonderful idea!
I think me and a lot are to the point of saying fuck it. Ill take my chances. We have a few treatments available if needed now and most are asymptomatic. I know there are others with opposing view points but we are where we are and nobody is going back. [Reply]
If it's in fact the case that there's no shown passing from kids to adults, that would help with getting schools and such back. The school thing is such a tough equation with this because of so many kids getting food and general care from school they don't get at home.
My mom runs the cafeterias in the town i grew up in schools and they've been doing lunches and she set up a "take home" program during this. She's been going in and preparing meals and such that they have families come pick up if needed. They were doing 500 meals per day in a town with a population of about 3k. I'm sure there are some that don't necessarily need them, but for the most part it's needed.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Yeah. I translated the article from Dutch so the reading was not easy.
We would need to know how accurate these antibodies tests are , some numbers just don’t explain what they are seeing in NYC, I assume the numbers will end up being lower than expected for both deaths and hospitalizations [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
We would need to know how accurate these antibodies tests are , some numbers just don’t explain what they are seeing in NYC, I assume the numbers will end up being lower than expected for both deaths and hospitalizations
I think we've gotten to the point that we can say NY is just an outlier. Something has happened there thats just different. So far atleast. [Reply]
