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.”
Let's look at a country\demographic similar to ours which would be the UK. They peaked on April 10th and it wasn't until the first of July before they got under 1k cases. They are still averaging over 100 deaths a day but to get to suppression you would need less than 10 IIRC. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
Let's look at a country\demographic similar to ours which would be the UK. They peaked on April 10th and it wasn't until the first of July before they got under 1k cases. They are still averaging over 100 deaths a day but to get to suppression you would need less than 10 IIRC.
Expecting cases to go down to 0 just isn't gonna happen. It's gonna be here probably for the extent of humans now.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Expecting cases to go down to 0 just isn't gonna happen. It's gonna be here probably for the extent of humans now.
Suppression isn't gonna happen anywhere.
We won't get it to zero but I think we can suppress it like we have done with the measles. Of course that will largely depend of people taking the vaccine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
We won't get it to zero but I think we can suppress it like we have done with the measles.
My hope is just that it'll work out to something like:
20% of people have been infected (lots of studies suggesting actual infections are 10x known cases)
40% of people are naturally immune
50% of people get the vaccine
There's a lot of overlap in those groups almost certainly, but if all of those are in the rough ballpark, I think this can get stamped out to a very small number of deaths per year from it.
The big question I have is whether we'll need to get yearly (or more often) vaccines, but that's the stuff that can be figured out if needed. Even if you have to get it quarterly (which I think is very unlikely), that's a problem that we can solve. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My hope is just that it'll work out to something like:
20% of people have been infected (lots of studies suggesting actual infections are 10x known cases)
40% of people are naturally immune
50% of people get the vaccine
There's a lot of overlap in those groups almost certainly, but if all of those are in the rough ballpark, I think this can get stamped out to a very small number of deaths per year from it.
The big question I have is whether we'll need to get yearly (or more often) vaccines, but that's the stuff that can be figured out if needed. Even if you have to get it quarterly (which I think is very unlikely), that's a problem that we can solve.
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My hope is just that it'll work out to something like:
20% of people have been infected (lots of studies suggesting actual infections are 10x known cases)
40% of people are naturally immune
50% of people get the vaccine
There's a lot of overlap in those groups almost certainly, but if all of those are in the rough ballpark, I think this can get stamped out to a very small number of deaths per year from it.
The big question I have is whether we'll need to get yearly (or more often) vaccines, but that's the stuff that can be figured out if needed. Even if you have to get it quarterly (which I think is very unlikely), that's a problem that we can solve.
This all seems reasonable. We just have to hope we get good news on the vaccine front sooner rather than later.
I like that you put the vaccine percentage at about 50%. It may prove to be a bit higher or lower, but I think it's a reasonable benchmark. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My hope is just that it'll work out to something like:
20% of people have been infected (lots of studies suggesting actual infections are 10x known cases)
40% of people are naturally immune
50% of people get the vaccine
There's a lot of overlap in those groups almost certainly, but if all of those are in the rough ballpark, I think this can get stamped out to a very small number of deaths per year from it.
The big question I have is whether we'll need to get yearly (or more often) vaccines, but that's the stuff that can be figured out if needed. Even if you have to get it quarterly (which I think is very unlikely), that's a problem that we can solve.
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
We won't get it to zero but I think we can suppress it like we have done with the measles. Of course that will largely depend of people taking the vaccine.
People have kinda lost their minds in terms of risks and years lost etc. I don't think it'll get to measles levels of suppression. We don't have the stomach to do it for the flu, so essentially if we get it down to that level, we should be ok? [Reply]
Eh its not complicated, the places that had success early had low infection rates so they still have limited immunity to it. Not surprising they could have another spike.
As has been pointed out, this bug isn't going away so there are only 2 routes out of this unless it mutates itself out of existence. [Reply]
But a recent study of 100 recovered coronavirus patients reveals 78 of them now have lasting cardiovascular damage even though a vast majority of them had mild cases of COVID-19 in the first place.
The study published Monday in JAMA Cardiology details the results of cardiac MRI exams of 100 recovered coronavirus patients. Twenty-eight of them required oxygen supplementation while fighting the virus, while just two were on ventilators. But 78 of them still had cardiovascular abnormalities after recovery, with 60 of them showing "ongoing myocardial inflammation," the study shows. These conditions appeared to be independent of case severity and pre-existing conditions, though JAMA researchers note these findings need a larger study. [Reply]
But a recent study of 100 recovered coronavirus patients reveals 78 of them now have lasting cardiovascular damage even though a vast majority of them had mild cases of COVID-19 in the first place.
The study published Monday in JAMA Cardiology details the results of cardiac MRI exams of 100 recovered coronavirus patients. Twenty-eight of them required oxygen supplementation while fighting the virus, while just two were on ventilators. But 78 of them still had cardiovascular abnormalities after recovery, with 60 of them showing "ongoing myocardial inflammation," the study shows. These conditions appeared to be independent of case severity and pre-existing conditions, though JAMA researchers note these findings need a larger study.
I posted that last night. Here's a response from someone who has a lot of knowledge in the area.
So I read the article. First of all it was very few patients. Too small to really tell if it is common or not in the general population. It's just an observation they are making. And all it really says is there was inflammation observed early in the recovery process. I didn't see anything about lasting tissue damage. And it said virus was not present in the cardiac tissue. [Reply]
