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 petegz28:
I don't want to discount these types of cases at all but people point to them and in doing so ignore to 99 other cases that are not like that. We have got to keep perspective on this. Does anyone think lew is going to die? NO! And the ****er has had it twice as far as we know.
Pretty easy to say when it isn't you.
And I don't know where you get the "99 other cases" number. We could add over 10 million missed cases to our number, and the number of deaths would still be over 1%. Let alone people who get really sick from this thing. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
I think in that same document they labeled school openings high risk.
If kids 10-19 transmit like adults I think it is going to be very hard to open up schools at least in large towns. Maybe more rural areas will be able to do that though.
10-19 year olds in rural areas are not going to social distance any better than urban kids, if it's possible or not. (unfortunately) [Reply]
Originally Posted by tk13:
Pretty easy to say when it isn't you.
And I don't know where you get the "99 other cases" number. We could add over 10 million missed cases to our number, and the number of deaths would still be over 1%. Let alone people who get really sick from this thing.
No, it's not easy, it's understanding that for every case like that person there are 99 others that are not like that. You can spray all the numbers you want it actually hurts the point you are trying to make but whatever. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I don't want to discount these types of cases at all but people point to them and in doing so ignore to 99 other cases that are not like that. We have got to keep perspective on this. Does anyone think lew is going to die? NO! And the fucker has had it twice as far as we know.
You were pretty scared when you thought your family member had it.
And ignoring Freddie Freeman instead of focusing on the other “99” is the problem. He’s a world class athlete suffering from this virus. It’s too variable too know who it will cause problems for and who it won’t. Are you so sure you’d have a mild case? I don’t know how anyone can draw that conclusion. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KS Smitty:
10-19 year olds in rural areas are not going to social distance any better than urban kids, if it's possible or not. (unfortunately)
I think the thought is that rural areas dont have much covid. If nobody has it, it doesnt just appear because a group of people are close together. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
No, it's not easy, it's understanding that for every case like that person there are 99 others that are not like that. You can spray all the numbers you want it actually hurts the point you are trying to make but whatever.
Spray all the numbers I want? What are you even talking about? Most people who really get sick from this don't die. I'm literally telling you that around 1 out of 100 people die from this thing.
Today's math lesson:
100 - 1 = 99 other cases
If you say "99 other cases" don't die, you would probably be about right. To say "99 other cases" don't get sick, then obviously you're arguing that everyone who gets very ill from this virus dies.
Of course this is really my fault for trying to apply 1st grade math skills here. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lewdog:
You were pretty scared when you thought your family member had it.
And ignoring Freddie Freeman instead of focusing on the other “99” is the problem. He’s a world class athlete suffering from this virus. It’s too variable too know who it will cause problems for and who it won’t. Are you so sure you’d have a mild case? I don’t know how anyone can draw that conclusion.
No, you can go back and look at my posts. I was more worried about the crap my Wife and I were going to have to go through than my Son making it through Covid.
Am i sure I'd have a mild case? No. Are the odds in my favor? Yes. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KS Smitty:
10-19 year olds in rural areas are not going to social distance any better than urban kids, if it's possible or not. (unfortunately)
I realize that but my thinking was that rural areas covid cases would be very small. Obviously if they have a lot of cases you can’t open schools [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyecopeland:
I think the thought is that rural areas dont have much covid. If nobody has it, it doesnt just appear because a group of people are close together.
This is true, I meant the fact that young people have a hard time social distancing, even when they try. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
I realize that but my thinking was that rural areas covid cases would be very small. Obviously if they have a lot of cases you can’t open schools
I think Logan Kansas is having a pretty bad outbreak for its size but yes as a general rule rural areas have done well keeping cases low. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
No, you can go back and look at my posts. I was more worried about the crap my Wife and I were going to have to go through than my Son making it through Covid.
Am i sure I'd have a mild case? No. Are the odds in my favor? Yes.
Come on over and let’s see.
I knew within a few hours I had it. I brought it home to my wife and 2 year old. The same virus that has my healthy 56 years old coworker on 15L oxygen for over a week, fighting for his life in the hospital. He’s going to have permanent pulmonary dysfunction from this virus. He’s 1 step away from a ventilator.
The same virus I gave to my family, but please continue to blow it off. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lewdog:
Come on over and let’s see.
I knew within a few hours I had it. I brought it home to my wife and 2 year old. The same virus that has my healthy 56 years old coworker on 15L oxygen for over a week, fighting for his life in the hospital. He’s going to have permanent pulmonary dysfunction from this virus. He’s 1 step away from a ventilator.
The same virus I gave to my family, but please continue to blow it off.
Yeah, cause I am blowing it off. That's the problems with people like you. I state the actual, factual data and you get pissed off about it. You can run out all the straw men you want but that doesn't change the actual data and you're pissed about it.
That data shows what is shows. I didn't make it that way. It's not my fault if I look at the data rather than one or two cases and make my assumptions.
In fact, lew, you are case proof of my point, but yeah, you know, I am blowing it off. [Reply]