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 lewdog:
Is it acceptable for people in surge States like AZ to be waiting 10+ days for results for well over a month now?
Nope because anything over 3-5 days wait is useless.
The company I work for is doing testing all across MO for our staff and the community and they just sent out an email today that now it is going to take 7-10 days if we are lucky to get results back. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
10 plus days or a month?
Hope your feeling better.
Originally Posted by Pants:
It has been a month since people have had to wait for fewer than 10 days to get their tests back.
It speaks to how backed up the labs are.
This. Since the middle of June, people here are waiting 10 days or more on average to get their test results. That's the shittiest planning and testing you can have. It basically does no good when it's run like this. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Everyone hails South Korea for their testing and yet they had serology reports come out that they were catching 1 in 10.
This ****er is just tough.
Serology tests haven't been great anywhere I understand why they started doing them but they haven't that beneficial or maybe I am missing something. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
Nope because anything over 3-5 days wait is useless.
The company I work for is doing testing all across MO for our staff and the community and they just sent out an email today that now it is going to take 7-10 days if we are lucky to get results back.
we were at 7-10 days at the start but we are 4 hrs drives from nearest testing site at first it is about 48Hrs now, I understand we are testing way less though. [Reply]
1) There is a lot of talk about decaying antibodies. I would like to walk you through a few findings about antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 that we put on medRxiv on Friday. Ill do this slowly over the day (while being in nonstop conference calls). But I feel this needs to get out there.
Originally Posted by O.city:
I think thats why we kinda need to just go by hospitalizations and such. Seems to be the only way to tell with testing being this way.
It's a quick turnaround here in our area. 1-2 days.
Here in Clinton it is taking over a week. Probably depends on what lab each hospital is sending to though I am pretty sure our lone hospital uses Quest. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
we were at 7-10 days at the start but we are 4 hrs drives from nearest testing site at first it is about 48Hrs now, I understand we are testing way less though.
Originally Posted by lewdog:
This. Since the middle of June, people here are waiting 10 days or more on average to get their test results. That's the shittiest planning and testing you can have. It basically does no good when it's run like this.
I'm guessing it's intentional in a lot of states. Or at least intentionally not putting any effort towards a sufficient amount of testing. [Reply]
The number of people who have had Covid-19 was much greater than the official case count, according to data and a new analysis released by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the country is far from a level that would give the population herd immunity.
Depending on the region, the number of people infected was sometimes six to 24 times the number of reported cases, the CDC team said.
“For most sites, it is likely that greater than 10 times more SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred than the number of reported COVID-19 cases,” the team concluded.
These numbers are likely conservative, according to the study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The data used in the analysis was published on the CDC website Tuesday.
CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield said earlier this month that testing had likely missed 90% or so of cases.
The CDC wanted to see if the official test tally showed the actual numbers of infections. They analyzed test results from 16,000 people in 10 geographically diverse cities and states done between March and early May. These people were tested, not because they had coronavirus symptoms but for other reasons – for instance, if they were having surgery and the hospital did the test as a matter of course.
These tests would give a broader sense of who has been infected by the novel coronavirus than just the number of people who have sought tests because they didn’t feel well and suspected they had Covid-19.
There is a limit to this methodology. These people tested may not have been representative of the general population, nor does it take into account the disease exposure risk. It’s also possible that there could be some overlap, and people may have been tested more than once, the CDC said. The infections may not be evenly distributed even in these regions.
The results do show that the majority of people in these 10 sites have not had Covid-19. It also shows that people who are asymptomatic are still contributing to the spread of the disease, so the authors argue that the public should continue to take steps to prevent the spread by wearing masks, staying physically distant and staying home as much as possible. [Reply]
I've always used real cases = 10x confirmed cases as a general guideline. Bump it down to maybe 5x when positive test % is really low, and bump it up to 15x or 20x when positive test % is through the roof.
But this whole stealth class of people who never get symptoms and never get antibodies throws that for a loop. The 10x was based on antibody studies. But then again if those people can get it again in a few months like lewdog, they might not even count. [Reply]