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 MahomesMagic:
I am sure there is much more..
By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.
Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.
On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:
We are struggling to get the needed Ppe into hospitals and we think nursing homes can do it? Nursing homes are having massive problems keeping infections out and they’re testing and trying more than anywhere.
Again, when there is just this much infection I don’t think you can unless you just have the workers basically stay on site at facilities [Reply]
It took those authors several months to get their findings published, in part because there are massive issues with the study. Every study has limitations, but theirs are so numerous in the investigational process that you might as well chuck the data.
First, it's near impossible to have a truly randomized clinical trial of good rigor when you rely on the public to self-report adherence. Everyone always overstates how adherent they are to therapies, even for life-threatening conditions like congestive heart failure. Relying on self-reporting is a great way to have garbage-in-garbage-out data, which is why in most traditional clinical trials the clinician/investigator sees the intervention actually administered to the patient.
Secondly, the study was implemented during a massive lockdown in the country in question when most of the people were at home...where people don't wear masks, even in lockdown situations, which eliminates any ability to predict the efficacy of the intervention.
Finally, the reliance on antibody tests with a high false-positive rate relative to community levels of spread at the time of data collection further muddies any attempt to draw a definitive conclusion from the data.
Just like how people misunderstood the earlier mask study and spouted off the "85% of people with masks got COVID" line that was unsupported by the actual data in the study, they will misunderstand this as well, because the sad fact of the matter is that most people are not trained to properly read and interpret this data. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Once I either get it or have serology testing they I’ve had it or get vaccinated I’m goin back to real life
Dr. Fauci said in his Cuomo interview tonight that even if you get the vaccine, and your in the 95% that are showing antibodies in your blood, you won’t get Covid. Done. But not so fast......
You may still be able to pass on the virus to a non-vaccinated person. Because there is no study or data showing whether a vaccinated person can pass on the virus or not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Dr. Fauci said in his Cuomo interview tonight that even if you get the vaccine, and your in the 95% that are showing antibodies in your blood, you won’t get Covid. Done. But not so fast......
You may still be able to pass on the virus to a non-vaccinated person. Because there is no study or data showing whether a vaccinated person can pass on the virus or not.
Sorry but that’s on other people to be vaccinated
I’m all about precautions at this point, but once there are widespread vaccinations and you refuse, that’s on you not me [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Sorry but that’s on other people to be vaccinated
I’m all about precautions at this point, but once there are widespread vaccinations and you refuse, that’s on you not me
So what’s your grace period?
Maybe because of your profession you can get the vaccine in January/February. Your 45 year old neighbor with no pre-existing conditions can’t get the vaccine until May/June through no fault of their own. Tough shit on them if you pass it on to them? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
So what’s your grace period?
Maybe because of your profession you can get the vaccine in January/February. Your 45 year old neighbor with no pre-existing conditions can’t get the vaccine until May/June through no fault of their own. Tough shit on them if you pass it on to them?
My neighbor and I are in a bit of a feud right now so I wouldn’t hate it.
But in all honesty, yeah. We’re at the point again where we are pretty sure it’s gonna stop transmission but we don’t know so we’ll wait and see.
I’m 33 and healthy so I’ll pass early so others who need it more can get it so it’s all moot.
But yeah, once a normal situation occurs and everyone has their opp for vaccination the world goes back to normal. Sorry that’s life [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
But yeah, once a normal situation occurs and everyone has their opp for vaccination the world goes back to normal. Sorry that’s life
I agree at that point. After everyone had been given the chance to get the vaccine it’s not on you anymore. Guilt free for sure. If you have the opportunity to get the vaccine and you turn it down and then get Covid, that’s on you.
I think there’s going to be a period where some have the vaccine and take off the mask, party etc. but millions of other citizens hadn’t yet even been given the chance to get the vaccine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Sorry but that’s on other people to be vaccinated
I’m all about precautions at this point, but once there are widespread vaccinations and you refuse, that’s on you not me
Yeah, I'm not going to interfere with Darwinism.
I'd probably limit my normal activities until everyone's had a chance, but once I get vaccinated I'll start getting out again. However, my activity will be muted until 80 to 90 percent are vaccinated. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
I agree at that point. After everyone had been given the chance to get the vaccine it’s not on you anymore. Guilt free for sure. If you have the opportunity to get the vaccine and you turn it down and then get Covid, that’s on you.
I think there’s going to be a period where some have the vaccine and take off the mask, party etc. but millions of other citizens hadn’t yet even been given the chance to get the vaccine.
To some extent, though, that process may be self-governing. If I'm the first person to get the vaccine, it may cut my odds of getting the virus by 90+ percent, but that's still a 10 percent chance. And those who get the vaccine early will likely be the vulnerable ones or the ones with a lot of contact. I think the effect of the vaccine won't be fully felt until you get enough people vaccinated to stunt the spread. [Reply]
