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 DaneMcCloud:
Now that wearing a mask outside the home, regardless of what you're doing, is a law, the new motto is "Mask It Or Casket".
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Now that wearing a mask outside the home, regardless of what you're doing, is a law, the new motto is "Mask It Or Casket".
Sometimes, I really, really hate this city.
Well, it is Hollywood....drama sorta goes with the territory, doesn't it? [Reply]
Well, reduced menu be damned we made reservations for Saturday night. One of our favorite places finally re-opened and it will be nice to eat at someone else's table for a change. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Co-worker and I had a discussion about the asymptomatic people and "shedding". Let me ask you, do you think we know for a fact these people are shedding? I mean is it a given or is it just an assumption?
Think of it this way:
Asymptomatic people have positive tests. To get a positive test you (99% of the time) have to have virus present. They're performing a nasopharyngeal swab, and the virus is there. If it's there I can't think of why it wouldn't be expelled in respiratory droplets. It already made it that far up from the lungs.
Now, I don't know if they've performed any studies on the amount of viral shedding. A fairly simple experiment might be to culture the respiratory droplets of asymptomatic vs symptomatic mild vs symptomatic severe cases. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
Now that wearing a mask outside the home in Los Angeles, regardless of what you're doing, is a law, the new motto is "Mask It Or Casket".
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
Think of it this way:
Asymptomatic people have positive tests. To get a positive test you (99% of the time) have to have virus present. They're performing a nasopharyngeal swab, and the virus is there. If it's there I can't think of why it wouldn't be expelled in respiratory droplets. It already made it that far up from the lungs.
Now, I don't know if they've performed any studies on the amount of viral shedding. A fairly simple experiment might be to culture the respiratory droplets of asymptomatic vs symptomatic mild vs symptomatic severe cases.
It just seems to me that we are finding almost like 30x more asymptomatic people to symptomatic when we do these tests in place like meat packing plants and what not. That's a lot of fucking people to have this and not bum rushing the hospitals let alone dropping dead.
I don't now just things don't always seem to be adding up. [Reply]
Saying the won't open the city until they find the cure as well.
Okay, in his defense he did say something like "or a suitable treatment" but yes, your point is spot on. It was a fucking idiotic thing to say. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Since you want to call it out...
I said Hamas is a miserable fuck and even though everybody wants to suck his cock in here, I don’t really give a shit what he has to say or how smart he is. I’m sure he knows his shit, but that also doesn’t mean everything he says in this thread is the gospel.
Then I remembered he’s going through some fucked up shit so I can’t say I know what that’s like.
Why is it that between you and Hamas, you are the only one so angry? Hell, I see it with nearly anyone you disagree with.
Originally Posted by petegz28:
It just seems to me that we are finding almost like 30x more asymptomatic people to symptomatic when we do these tests in place like meat packing plants and what not. That's a lot of fucking people to have this and not bum rushing the hospitals let alone dropping dead.
I don't now just things don't always seem to be adding up.
I think a lot of it is based upon people's belief that the present situation will predict the future.
We all accept that if someone is diagnosed with lung cancer, even if they're asymptomatic now that without treatment they're going to start to feel worse.
When those workers are being tested, they're largely asymptomatic at that time, but we also don't know how long they've been infected. If they were infected two weeks ago, then they're probably going to stay asymptomatic. If they were infected two days ago, they can become symptomatic later, but if we only hear about the initial number we think, "Wow, all these people are asymptomatic."
When people use prisons and meat packing plants as a way to explain case load they're really only telling part of the story because a positive test is a snapshot. If you follow these people throughout their course and then follow up you can gain a much better understanding. [Reply]
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Okay, in his defense he did say something like "or a suitable treatment" but yes, your point is spot on. It was a ****ing idiotic thing to say.
There is definitely a lot of overkill out there. I mean, I get be careful, be smart but wholly crap, some people are taking it to the extreme. A guy 3 houses down lives by himself and wears a mask inside his house. :-) I mean, does he think the TV is going to shed the Rona or what? I asked him about it and he said, "I'm just trying to be extra safe." No dude, you are fucking nuts. [Reply]
Originally Posted by :
The Colorado Department of Health and Environment is listing coronavirus as cause of death of a Colorado man despite the county coroner ruling that he died of ethanol toxicity with an astounding 0.55 blood-alcohol level.
A blood-alcohol level of 0.3 is generally considered fatal.
Although the unidentified man tested positive for coronavirus, County Coroner George Deavers said he disagreed with the state's assessment after his investigation with a pathologist revealed that the man's blood-alcohol content was nearly seven times the legal driving limit of 0.08.
"COVID was not listed on the death certificate as the cause of death. I disagree with the state for listing it as a COVID death, and will be discussing it with them this week," Deavers said Tuesday.
As of Monday, the Montezuma County Public Health Department reports just two COVID-19 deaths, whereas the state department lists three deaths caused by the virus. A spokesperson for the department explained the difference in the reports.
"The person who died did not die from COVID-19, but they did test positive for the virus," the spokesperson said. "The state is reporting that death as a COVID death, but our health department wanted to let people know that even though the person did have the virus, they did not die from it."
