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.”
Is this it? 93% is pretty good and not surprised that they are advocating for a 3rd boost might be needed for additional variants in the fall / winter.
How do you compare the efficacy of the unvaccinated vs the vaccinated?
That's what the 93% is. Vaccinated people are 93% less likely to contract COVID compared to unvaccinated people. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
As if you know shit about any of it. You're just parroting your chosen sources like everybody else.
It doesn't matter how much I know about the drug or the disease. I know that zinc/HCQ has had very good results. That's all that matters.
Know who might know a thing or two about it? The American Journal of Medicine, which recommends HCQ, Azithromycin, and Zinc as the most effective treatment.
But you once saw a post which said that it's ineffective with or without zinc and now you're ready to argue it to the death. :-)
My 25 years as a medical professional troubleshooting human anatomy and physiology and my wife who is a family doctor just like DR zelenko might give me a slight advantage in this subject than you. I might not be an expert on virology but I am pretty good at telling if a DR is full of shit or not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by carlos3652:
Thank you! Makes sense.So when they say 100% vs death, are they saying the 100% people are dying are unvaccinated?
I believe that's only looking at the Phase 3 clinical trial participant numbers only. That doesn't mean that none of the 70,000,000 Americans who have been fully vaccinated with Moderna have died. [Reply]
"Keep your political bullshit in DC and out of all other forums"
Hope this helps:
Suck my dick.
If the mods felt it was political, it would be gone by now.
And if by some chance they haven't seen it yet, and feel it's political they'll pull it down or ask me to.
I'm guessing they don't see it the way you do, snowflake. And if they do, I won't complain about it like you do about well, literally, everything. [Reply]
Originally Posted by NotDonger:
I believe that's only looking at the Phase 3 clinical trial participant numbers only. That doesn't mean that none of the 70,000,000 Americans who have been fully vaccinated with Moderna have died.
Gotcha, that makes sense as well, that information is based on that trial they did internally with their participants.
Would love to see the list of participants that died and of what.
How many unvaccinated died of Covid?
How many unvaccinated died of "other"?
How many vaccinated died of "other"?
Originally Posted by carlos3652:
Gotcha, that makes sense as well, that information is based on that trial they did internally with their participants.
Would love to see the list of participants that died and of what.
How many unvaccinated died of Covid?
How many unvaccinated died of "other"?
How many vaccinated died of "other"?
Out of 14k who took the vax, only 11 got it, and out of the 14k placebo, only 185 got it. (94% efficacy)
"Among all participants in the Per-Protocol Set analysis, which included COVID‑19 cases confirmed by an adjudication committee, no cases of severe COVID‑19 were reported in the Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine group compared with 30 cases reported in the placebo group (incidence rate 9.138 per 1,000 person-years). One PCR-positive case of severe COVID‑19 in a vaccine recipient was awaiting adjudication at the time of the analysis."
Also some good info on Vax issues -
Safety Analysis of Clinical Trial Data
The safety of Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine was evaluated in an ongoing Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, observer-blind clinical trial conducted in the United States involving 30,351 participants 18 years of age and older who received at least one dose of Moderna COVID‑19 Vaccine (n=15,185) or placebo (n=15,166) (NCT04470427). In clinical studies, the adverse reactions in participants 18 years of age and older were:
Pain at the injection site (92.0%)
Fatigue (70.0%)
Headache (64.7%)
Myalgia (61.5%)
Arthralgia (46.4%)
Chills (45.4%)
Nausea/vomiting (23.0%)
Axillary swelling/tenderness (19.8%)
Fever (15.5%)
Swelling at the injection site (14.7%)
Erythema at the injection site (10.0%). [Reply]
That's data from last year that they used to apply for emergency use authorization. This is the 6 months of data required to apply for Full Authorization. This update is likely from data that ended late February or in March. [Reply]
Out of 14k who took the vax, only 11 got it, and out of the 14k placebo, only 185 got it. (94% efficacy)
Yes. And as "DaFace" mentioned, 94% efficacy means that the vaccinated reduced the risk of developing COVID-19 by 94% compared to the placebo/unvaccinated group.
If 185 of the vaccinated group had developed COVID-19, the efficacy would be 0%
Keep in mind that efficacy percentages do NOT mean that that percentage of the vaccinated will develop COVID-19 (e.g., 6 to 7% per above). [Reply]
Originally Posted by loochy:
He's acknowledging that his snipe is irrelevant, as you claimed. He's also telling you to look in the mirror and realize that your points of view are equally as irrelevant. (in his POV, of course).
It's kind of a "yeah, I know...but you aren't that great either, so get off of your high horse"
