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.”
Humans are hyper-social creatures. Which means we will occasionally put the good of the pack above our own needs, even survival.
If the leaders of the govt-suspicious tribes these people moved in said the vaccine was fine, they'd get it. But their leaders, and the people their leaders follow and the people their leaders follow, are all in against the vaccine. So everyone down the line is reflexively against it. And in the internet age you can always find instant validation for any viewpoint you want to believe. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
Humans are hyper-social creatures. Which means we will occasionally put the good of the pack above our own needs, even survival.
If the leaders of the govt-suspicious tribes these people moved in said the vaccine was fine, they'd get it. But their leaders, and the people their leaders follow and the people their leaders follow, are all in against the vaccine. So everyone down the line is reflexively against it. And in the internet age you can always find instant validation for any viewpoint you want to believe.
I’m not sure what point your first sentence is trying to make. The rest you are simply describing people finding things to protect their beliefs and personalities like I said in the original post. You are describing the after effect of choices made prior. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mr. tegu:
I’m not sure what point your first sentence is trying to make. The rest you are simply describing people finding things to protect their beliefs and personalities like I said in the original post. You are describing the after effect of choices made prior.
I'm saying that tribalism is the instinct that drives the behavior you originally described. [Reply]
That's will be my last post in this exchange that I'm sure no one else cares about.
It's nonsense to say that something like mass resistance to the covid vaccine would exist in a vacuum without a social/family group dynamic. Most people look to others for how to think on that stuff, whether they realize it or not. If most of the people around them in their life and the media figures they follow were all saying get the vaccine, only a tiny amount of people would still resist out of some kind of personal cause. Humans just aren't wired that way. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
That's will be my last post in this exchange that I'm sure no one else cares about.
It's nonsense to say that something like mass resistance to the covid vaccine would exist in a vacuum without a social/family group dynamic. Most people look to others for how to think on that stuff, whether they realize it or not. If most of the people around them in their life and the media figures they follow were all saying get the vaccine, only a tiny amount of people would still resist out of some kind of personal cause. Humans just aren't wired that way.
You clearly aren’t understanding. You have also shown poor understanding of human behavior as evidenced by your shame attempts to vaccinate throughout this thread which have been called out multiple times by others.
Since you want to attribute lack of vaccines to tribalism, do tell, what “tribe” accounts for 45% of the population (amount not vaccinated about) that also contains every race, ethnicity, income level, geographic background, etc. And then please explain why that tribe doesn’t include people over 65 who are close to 90% vaccinated. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
If someone can look at the vaccine data and think that they are in some way "dangerous", they clearly don't understand mathematics.
Well, I guess I didn't really explain well enough. It's not like most of them looked at data and came to a stupid conclusion.
Their 'sources' of information basically says that data or news story is fake. So I would say calling them deluded would be more accurate than calling most of them dumb.
Always exceptions, of course.
Maybe I'm being pedantic, but I don't think most people are intentionally doing stupid things to jeopardize their health. So I think it's worth keeping in mind what the real drivers are. Although that quickly becomes a DC topic. Which is why I kept my previous comment brief. [Reply]
Originally Posted by mr. tegu:
You clearly aren’t understanding. You have also shown poor understanding of human behavior as evidenced by your shame attempts to vaccinate throughout this thread which have been called out multiple times by others.
Since you want to attribute lack of vaccines to tribalism, do tell, what “tribe” accounts for 45% of the population (amount not vaccinated about) that also contains every race, ethnicity, income level, geographic background, etc. And then please explain why that tribe doesn’t include people over 65 who are close to 90% vaccinated.
I mean that’s certainly one way of putting it depending on your viewpoint. And I do think there are people who fit that description somewhat within their personalities, so they are almost always going to make decisions with that trait as part of the process and then find ways of not having that perceived undesirable trait be the reason they don’t get vaccinated, hence the finding whatever evidence they can, regardless of truth in it. [Reply]
Antivaxxers' affection for Regeneron is fascinating. It's under an EUA, and is not FDA-approved. It's a new technology. Its clinical trials started just before the trials for the vaxxes, so we have no idea what the long-term effects of taking it are. And yet antivaxxers love it.
And during testing of MaB, Regeneron used the HEK293T cell line, which is derived from the kidney of an embryo aborted in 1973. Use of fetal tissue in testing is another reason antivaxxers say the vaxxes are unacceptable. But it's apparently no problem for Regeneron's treatment.
It really is weird phenomenon. Experimental treatments never seem to scare anyone, just vaccines that have been tested much more thoroughly. I guess when you're already sick it's a different story. [Reply]
