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 Donger:
Sweden has a much worse per capita death rate than we do. Even the doctor who planned their response admits that they made mistakes.
Per capita death rate is a nice change of subject.
Explain how the estimates were so off without lockdown. [Reply]
The issue is we're seemingly still running on that initial prediction of 2 million dead by summer(?), and the people supposedly that know what they're doing keep changing the narratives. Wear a mask, don't wear a mask. Don't gather for concerts or parties, protests don't spread the virus. ICU beds are full, death count is dropping drastically. We're being spun around and nobody knows exactly what is happening by all appearances and people are fed up watching businesses and their lives slowly die off for fear of some world ending plague that really isn't that. THAT is why people are bitching, and I get it.
The recommendations for the task force have been consistent since mid-March. The predictions made regarding deaths with mitigation efforts have been accurate. They provided guidance for when reopening should start, and it wasn't followed.
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Yes, these numbers posted based on similar models to the ones stating 2.2 million dead in the US predicted 100,000 dead in Sweden.
Well, since we did lockdown, we'll never know how accurate the 1 to 2 million dead estimate was, right?
Dr. Anthony Fauci said based on modeling of the current pace of the coronavirus' spread in the U.S., "between 100,000 and 200,000" people may die from COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
Fauci's comments on CNN's State of the Union underscore just how far away the U.S. is from the peak of the outbreak based on predictions from top federal officials. As of early Sunday afternoon, there were 125,000 cases in the U.S. and nearly 2,200 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.
Public health experts say that because of undocumented chains of transmission in many parts of the country, the number of new coronavirus cases in the U.S. is set to keep surging as more and more test results become known.
Fauci said the 100,000-to-200,000 death figure is a middle-of-the-road estimate, much lower than worse-case-scenario predictions.
He said preparing for 1 million to 2 million Americans to die from the coronavirus is "almost certainly off the chart," adding: "Now it's not impossible, but very, very unlikely."
I'd like to see the estimate that Sweden could have faced 100,000 deaths. I presume that was the high end? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Donger:
The recommendations for the task force have been consistent since mid-March. The predictions made regarding deaths with mitigation efforts have been accurate. They provided guidance for when reopening should start, and it wasn't followed.
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
The problem with the "million of dead bodies" concept is we saw countries do no lockdown and nothing of the sort happened.
According to the same models where 2 million would die in the US, 100,000 were supposed to die in Sweden. No lock-down, shutdown of businesses.
They washed their hands, voluntary social distancing. No masks. 5,000 dead, 73 percent from elderly care homes. Hospitals were fine, no overload.
The Doomer emperor has no clothes.
This is still wrong. I said two months ago the Sweden example is wrong, and it still is.
They are an entirely different culture than America, and we will never, ever, ever, ever be Sweden. People here are far more independent.
More importantly, their health care system is way different than ours. Literally no one is going to go bankrupt for catching this virus there. It's a lot easier to throw caution to the wind when you aren't risking a hospital bill. People conveniently overlook this.
Lastly, they have 5000 deaths. Their neighbors Finland and Norway have 500, combined. That's terrible. [Reply]
Dr. Anthony Fauci said based on modeling of the current pace of the coronavirus' spread in the U.S., "between 100,000 and 200,000" people may die from COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
Fauci's comments on CNN's State of the Union underscore just how far away the U.S. is from the peak of the outbreak based on predictions from top federal officials. As of early Sunday afternoon, there were 125,000 cases in the U.S. and nearly 2,200 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.
Public health experts say that because of undocumented chains of transmission in many parts of the country, the number of new coronavirus cases in the U.S. is set to keep surging as more and more test results become known.
Fauci said the 100,000-to-200,000 death figure is a middle-of-the-road estimate, much lower than worse-case-scenario predictions.
He said preparing for 1 million to 2 million Americans to die from the coronavirus is "almost certainly off the chart," adding: "Now it's not impossible, but very, very unlikely."
I'd like to see the estimate that Sweden could have faced 100,000 deaths. I presume that was the high end?
'Uppsala University took the Imperial College model – or one of them – and adapted it to Sweden and forecasted deaths in Sweden of over 90,000 by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if a full lockdown was inforced. In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden until the end of May. This does seem to be a huge discrepancy and suggests there was something wrong with the model...' https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...be-replicated-
The Imperial College model was used by the US and UK governments as a basis for lockdown.
The Imperial College model has been proven to be spectacularly wrong. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
'Uppsala University took the Imperial College model – or one of them – and adapted it to Sweden and forecasted deaths in Sweden of over 90,000 by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if a full lockdown was inforced. In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden until the end of May. This does seem to be a huge discrepancy and suggests there was something wrong with the model...' https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...be-replicated-
The Imperial College model was used by the US and UK governments as a basis for lockdown.
The Imperial College model has been proven to be spectacularly wrong.
You left this off for some reason:
Professor Ferguson: 'First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own. We had no role in parameterising it. Generally, the key aspect of modelling is how well you parameterise it against the available data. But to be absolutely clear they did not use our model, they didn’t adapt our model.'
I believe that the task force used the IC model and others, because they used 1 to 2.2 million dead without mitigation. And, again, we don't know how accurate that would have been, because we did lockdown and mitigated.
Do you acknowledge that the task force also estimated between 100,000 and 240,000 deaths with mitigation efforts? [Reply]
