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.”
If i'm remembering right, we want the specificity on these serology tests to be really high. I thought I read where the UW one had 100% specificity? [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
If i'm remembering right, we want the specificity on these serology tests to be really high. I thought I read where the UW one had 100% specificity?
Correct. Rules out false negatives, but to truly say that you have a specificity that high, you are going to need a massive number of tests to verify. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy:
Breakdown of the 177 that have passed away in MO
Of the deaths, 67 have been people 80 years of age or older; 48 were in their 70s; 38 were in their 60s and 16 were in their 50s. Eight of the deaths were patients under the age of 50.
That's good info to know. Thanks for passing it on. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
If i'm remembering right, we want the specificity on these serology tests to be really high. I thought I read where the UW one had 100% specificity?
That being said if true (USC) study suggest it’s exactly like the flu... Mortality rate wise [Reply]
I'm going to talk about something here hopefully it isn't lost on some people...
There's a "cult of work" at play that's way, way too ingrained in this country and desperately needs to be lightened.
A massive issue in America is that nearly from our inception as colonies we've tied work to the ability to survive. I don't just mean "the necessary labor to allow for survival", like building homes, or cultivating food, or anything like that; the "Protestant work ethic" the colonies were largely built on emphasized work as its own reward, that to be busy was to be godly, and that to be idle was to be a sinner, ideas which extended to things like immigration ("we don't want people from LAZY countries where they take siestas!") and temperance ("the drink too much, so we must BAN ALL ALCOHOL SALES!").
Ironically, that's not what most of human history has been; even during the age of feudalism/serfdom, an era I'm sure none of us would like to go back to, the expectation was typically that even if you were poor, you would never, outside of a famine/drought, be utterly destitute, because you would still be provided with food and shelter as someone living on a feudal estate, and the local lord would throw regular parties and festivals to keep you and your poor family happy, fed, and (often) drunk. Again, not a great social hierarchy at play there, but at least people could eat, even if they were often done with chores by mid-morning and then spent the rest of the day idling about town or hitting the pub.
But then industrialization began, and those who owned the machines that made industry happen needed cheap, abundant labor; thus, allowing people to be "idle" was no longer an option, as bodies were needed to work looms and engines. This meant that the very idea of survival had to be tied to work, to compel people to seek out employment to enrich the machine/factory owners, and this was accomplished with all kinds of practices: moral arguments saying that lack of work meant a lack of morality, social practices like turning poorhouses into nightmare homes to scare people away from using them, and effectively creating a culture that said "you work or you starve", a threat made all the more potent when farm living was made obsolete for many people and tons were forced to move to cities where they could no longer grow their own food or make their own clothing.
Some of the old mindset has survived in some places, and thus people in places around, say, Europe and parts of Asia tend to have expectations that their government should provide them with a certain standard of living independent of them being employed; you see it in countries where housing is guaranteed, or where unemployment benefits are generous, etc. The US, meanwhile, was built as industrialization was taking off and steeped in the old "work ethic" idea, leading to "work or starve" being a guiding principle. It's why we demand people search for work in order to get public help of almost any kind, even when there is no work to be had. This has created distinctions like "the deserving poor vs. the undeserving poor", building up a mythology that says that hard work always pays off (the American Dream), that constantly faults the individual for failings of the system, and that encourages us to never imagine a world where things can operate and people can live well without having our sense of identity, worth, and well-being revolving around paid labor.
This long-winded rant is not to say that work is bad; again, a great deal of labor is enormously necessary, and we're learning now who is truly "essential" in many places, and how often they're people who get paid peanuts. But it is a way of saying that this country, in particular, is filthy rich and makes an ungodly amount in GDP/GNP, yet we have a system where some people feel they have to demand the economy "reopen" (again, it isn't closed, there's money being made that could be spread around to help people) so that they can go back to work and likely contract a deadly virus that we don't have a vaccine and thus might potentially kill them and their families.
So, no, "the economy" should not be the concern here; the concern should be that this is the wealthiest nation-state in human history, yet we have people literally asking for the chance to go back out every day and risk death or ruinous disease because they're scared of the alternative. That's downright dystopian. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
That being said if true (USC) study suggest it’s exactly like the flu... Mortality rate wise
That study has not been peer reviewed nor has it released any of its methodology. Moreover, you are using infection rates from a period of April 10-11 when deaths lag two weeks behind infections, we don't know the protective effects of the antibody in question, and the tests were conducted by soliciting people to come to drive-thru antibody testing, which is not controlled. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
That study has not been peer reviewed nor has it released any of its methodology. Moreover, you are using infection rates from a period of April 10-11 when deaths lag two weeks behind infections, we don't know the protective effects of the antibody in question, and the tests were conducted by soliciting people to come to drive-thru antibody testing, which is not controlled.
The Swedish one seems to be the best setup I can find so far. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
That study has not been peer reviewed nor has it released any of its methodology. Moreover, you are using infection rates from a period of April 10-11 when deaths lag two weeks behind infections, we don't know the protective effects of the antibody in question, and the tests were conducted by soliciting people to come to drive-thru antibody testing, which is not controlled.
That would make it pretty much worthless wouldn't it? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Where do you come up with this nonsense?
We have 800,000 TOTAL cases. There are still 684,000 cases that haven't concluded yet resulting in EITHER a death or a recovery. There are 43,177 deaths. 72,561 recoveries. Deaths + Recoveries of cases with a result = 115,738. We know that the total cases reported are mostly the significant and more severe cases, so the CFR is much lower than this BUT of reported cases the death rate is 43,177 deaths / 115,738 total cases w/ a result = 37%. (The world rate is 21% of reported cases. Being that we are one of the obese nations of the world with many citizens with comorbidities this makes total sense. Being that we rarely test asymptomatic people & those who are younger experiencing mild symptoms, again this makes total sense)
Since we have 684,000 active cases, if we assume a constant death rate of those cases of 37% that is 255,171 That is probably high and worst case scenario. But even if we assume that at most HALF of the 684,000 active cases will recover (or have recovered and just aren't reported which is a HUUUGE stretch) then that gives us 342,000 active cases. Even if the death rate DECLINES to even 15% (which mind you is way below our current of 37% and 21% world death rate of REPORTED more significant cases) then that puts us at 51,300 more deaths.
This is the bare, bare minimum and best, best case scenario you could EVER hope for with these numbers and that is about 95k deaths. This doesn't take into account ANY new cases being reported. And the assumption that nobody ever gets Covid-19 ever again, and that nobody at home as Covid-19 currently. Which clearly will not be the case. We ALSO know that alot of deaths are slow to report so there are likely many deaths that have occurred that haven't even been reported yet.
With that data we can easily conclude we will eclipse 100k deaths very, very easily. And within the next 45 days even. [Reply]
At Tuesday's Orange County Board of County Commissioners meeting, a #WWE employee named "John" submitted public comment they're being "forced to work" TV tapings despite stay at home orders. Says he's unable to speak out and feels he will be fired if he approaches his higher-ups. pic.twitter.com/UJTvX1RGc7
To add to this, though, "John" said that despite the sanitation standards, there are no social distancing guidelines at shows even before they step into the ring so he's asking the government to shut down the tapings so they can adhere to stay-at-home orders.