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.”
[QUOTE=Marcellus;14892088]This really isn't true though. You give me shit about being wrong about things and post stuff like this. There is no evidence that has happened anywhere outside of a nursing home.[/
A study by disease modelers at the University of Texas at Austin states that "Given the low testing rates throughout the country, we assume that 1 in 10 cases are tested and reported. If a county has detected only 1 case of COVID-19, there is a 51%
chance that there is already a growing outbreak underway" [source]
[source] [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Yea I get it, cruise ships obviously. And obviously your scenario is possible in certain conditions like the party you referenced and I was incorrect.
it's cool. That is why I am worried about opening up to soon again, it just takes 1 or a handful. Gotta get a vaccine asap. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Gonna have to disagree, Bob. Both have meaning. In fact, you literally can't have one without the other so.....
It doesn't really matter if you disagree. The original poster said that per capita testing numbers are "retarded." They are clearly not. In fact, it's the most important metric. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
it's cool. That is why I am worried about opening up to soon again, it just takes 1 or a handful. Gotta get a vaccine asap.
Well at least the dialogue got me to researching patient 31.
For pure intrigue read this story on it. I don't believe the conspiracy floated in it but it's rather interesting. It makes you wonder how so many people did get infected.
More than 1,300 New York City fire department personnel who either tested positive or were suspected of being exposed to Covid-19 have returned to work, the FDNY said on Twitter today.
“FDNY members are responding to a record number of medical calls, and they continue to meet this unprecedented challenge head on,” said Fire Commissioner Daniel A. Nigro in a tweet posted by the department. [Reply]
or like this. And when I heard about that biogen conference I told my employer I wasn't going to the IT conference that I had scheduled in March. **** that.
Originally Posted by :
It was an old-fashioned Southern funeral.
There was a repast table crammed with casseroles, Brunswick stew, fried chicken and key lime cake. Andrew Jerome Mitchell, a retired janitor, was one of 10 siblings. They told stories, debated for the umpteenth time how he got the nickname Doorface.
People wiped tears away, and embraced, and blew their noses, and belted out hymns. They laughed, remembering. It was a big gathering, with upward of 200 mourners overflowing the memorial chapel, so people had to stand outside.
Dorothy Johnson has gone over the scene in her mind over the last month, asking herself who it was who brought the virus to her brother’s funeral.
“We don’t know who the person was,” she said. “It would help me to know.”
During the weeks that followed, illnesses linked to the coronavirus have torn through her hometown, Albany, Ga., with about two dozen relatives falling ill, including six of her siblings. Ms. Johnson herself was released from an isolation ward to the news that her daughter, Tonya, was in grave condition, her heart rate dropping.
Like the Biogen conference in Boston and a 40th birthday party in Westport, Conn., the funeral of Andrew Jerome Mitchell on Feb. 29 will be recorded as what epidemiologists call a “super-spreading event,” in which a small number of people propagate a huge number of infections.
With a population of only 90,000, Dougherty County has registered 24 deaths, far more than any other county in the state, with six more possible coronavirus deaths under investigation, according to Michael L. Fowler, the local coroner. Ninety percent of the people who died were African-American, he said.
Originally Posted by Donger:
It doesn't really matter if you disagree. The original poster said that per capita testing numbers are "retarded." They are clearly not. In fact, it's the most important metric.
Theoretically they might be. But there is a practical side to things that unfortunately have to be considered whether you like it or not. Specifically the logistical problems of testing en masse in a country our size.
In other words, it's a hell of a lot easier to test 50% of 1,000 than it is 50% of 5,000,000. [Reply]
A study by disease modelers at the University of Texas at Austin states that "Given the low testing rates throughout the country, we assume that 1 in 10 cases are tested and reported. If a county has detected only 1 case of COVID-19, there is a 51%
chance that there is already a growing outbreak underway" [source]
[source]
And if that assumption is true wouldn't the mortality rate be 1/10th of what we know? It seems like these numbers get used both ways all the time. More cases/higher mortality rate etc... [Reply]
Originally Posted by jerryaldini:
Sure, but now that we are seeing the plateau there, we can see it's well below what was anticipated. Social distancing has mitigated the impact considerably, as can be seen in curve flattening occurring since the measures were put in place.
I'm so impressed by the willingness of most Americans to comply to protect the vulnerable. It is also getting us out the other side sooner than half measures would have. In my state the projected peak and culmination has advanced by three weeks. About two weeks after we started distancing the growth rate declined precipitously.
Good luck trying to do a similar draconian (only word to use) lockdown again in the fall.
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Theoretically they might be. But there is a practical side to things that unfortunately have to be considered whether you like it or not. Specifically the logistical problems of testing en masse in a country our size.
In other words, it's a hell of a lot easier to test 50% of 1,000 than it is 50% of 5,000,000.
It's not a theory. Having tested a greater percentage of one's population is a vastly more important metric than total tests performed. I'm well-aware that our population is much greater than Iceland's or Germany's. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
And if that assumption is true wouldn't the mortality rate be 1/10th of what we know? It seems like these numbers get used both ways all the time. More cases/higher mortality rate etc...
Exactly but I sense yet another "but" as to why those numbers aren't right either. People are cherry picking to suit their argument. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
And if that assumption is true wouldn't the mortality rate be 1/10th of what we know? It seems like these numbers get used both ways all the time. More cases/higher mortality rate etc...
Well you’d think that but then there’s this...
An estimated additional 180 - 195 deaths per day occurring at home in New York City due to COVID-19 are not being counted in the official figures. "Early on in this crisis we were able to swab people who died at home, and thus got a coronavirus reading. But those days are long gone. We simply don't have the testing capacity for the large numbers dying at home. Now only those few who had a test confirmation *before* dying are marked as victims of coronavirus on their death certificate. This almost certainly means we are undercounting the total number of victims of this pandemic," said Mark Levine, Chair of New York City Council health committee [Reply]
