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 BigBeauford:
This is terrific. Look forward to you having to write something similar again in about a month.
A month seems optimistic when people are still asking why we don't treat the flue exactly the same way when it comes to vaccine mandates, etc; and people treat science like it's a political opinion.
Maybe twice per day for now and see how it goes? :-) [Reply]
He makes a great point. If you don't trust doctors telling you to get the vaccine, why go to the hospital and trust them to heal you when you get COVID? [Reply]
Originally Posted by wazu:
He makes a great point. If you don't trust doctors telling you to get the vaccine, why go to the hospital and trust them to heal you when you get COVID?
My wife has patients going to her office asking for advice and pretty much just disagree with her recommendation, why bother even going at that point , just do you own thing , I tell my wife to fire those patients and replace them with people willing to try and get better but she is too nice . [Reply]
Originally Posted by Fish:
No, there really aren't. There's a few individual quacks spewing misinformation. The problem is that misinformation then gets parroted by thousands and thousands of idiot twitter and Facebook sources. Making ignorant people actually think that there's plenty of medical professionals voicing concerns. Many people just gobble it up, because it confirms their bias.
Misinformation according to? Oh, right. Fact checkers with ties to Pfizer or funding from J&J.
Can't do a whole lot of parroting of "misinformation" on FB these days. In fact, you apparently can't even discuss vaccine side effects anymore. [Reply]
It's funny to see the weird psychology involved with how people are handling this.
A good example... Covid is an extremely low risk infection for most people (let's ignore the elderly and fatties) but a huge number of people act as if it's a death sentence and are hyper emotional over it. We also know that the vaccines are extremely low risk yet there is another distinct group who are convinced it's a conspiracy or some crazy risky thing.
What is amazing to me is how each group is not seeing the statistical hypocrisy of claiming one low risk thing is a big deal but the other is not.. [Reply]
Originally Posted by AustinChief:
It's funny to see the weird psychology involved with how people are handling this.
A good example... Covid is an extremely low risk infection for most people (let's ignore the elderly and fatties) but a huge number of people act as if it's a death sentence and are hyper emotional over it. We also know that the vaccines are extremely low risk yet there is another distinct group who are convinced it's a conspiracy or some crazy risky thing.
What is amazing to me is how each group is not seeing the statistical hypocrisy of claiming one low risk thing is a big deal but the other is not..
I felt this way much of the past year, but since Delta arrived I actually know people my age being hospitalized by COVID, and one guy who was healthy but died at age 25. A year ago these things weren’t happening that I could see outside of really old people. [Reply]
Originally Posted by AustinChief:
It's funny to see the weird psychology involved with how people are handling this.
A good example... Covid is an extremely low risk infection for most people (let's ignore the elderly and fatties) but a huge number of people act as if it's a death sentence and are hyper emotional over it. We also know that the vaccines are extremely low risk yet there is another distinct group who are convinced it's a conspiracy or some crazy risky thing.
What is amazing to me is how each group is not seeing the statistical hypocrisy of claiming one low risk thing is a big deal but the other is not..
It’s higher risk than any widespread virus we have seen in a long time. Especially early on in the pandemic we had little idea how deadly it would be. Not to mention how easy it can be to spread the virus to a high risk person in your life (pre-vaccine)
Why are we ignoring the elderly and those with chronic conditions? A huge percentage of our population is obese, smokes, has diabetes , has hypertension, has heart disease, etc etc.
Originally Posted by AustinChief:
It's funny to see the weird psychology involved with how people are handling this.
A good example... Covid is an extremely low risk infection for most people (let's ignore the elderly and fatties) but a huge number of people act as if it's a death sentence and are hyper emotional over it. We also know that the vaccines are extremely low risk yet there is another distinct group who are convinced it's a conspiracy or some crazy risky thing.
What is amazing to me is how each group is not seeing the statistical hypocrisy of claiming one low risk thing is a big deal but the other is not..
Pharma and the gov't have obvious potential motives to exaggerate the risk of Covid. Hospitals had a huge financial incentive to diagnose patients with Covid and put them on ventilators, which also inflated totals. And there are obvious motives to try to hide or downplay potential dangers of the vaccines. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Pharma and the gov't have obvious potential motives to exaggerate the risk of Covid. Hospitals had a huge financial incentive to diagnose patients with Covid and put them on ventilators, which also inflated totals. And there are obvious motives to try to hide or downplay potential dangers of the vaccines.
Hospitals that had full capacity had huge incentives to put people on ventilators?
You really think intensivists were intubating people for financial reasons? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Misinformation according to? Oh, right. Fact checkers with ties to Pfizer or funding from J&J.
Can't do a whole lot of parroting of "misinformation" on FB these days. In fact, you apparently can't even discuss vaccine side effects anymore.
According to the consensus of medical experts and scientists trained to study infectious disease. Who overwhelmingly agree that vaccines are safe and very beneficial. It's really pointless to argue it anymore. If you haven't been convinced of the safety and benefit of vaccines by now, no amount of factual information is ever going to change your mind. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Pharma and the gov't have obvious potential motives to exaggerate the risk of Covid. Hospitals had a huge financial incentive to diagnose patients with Covid and put them on ventilators, which also inflated totals. And there are obvious motives to try to hide or downplay potential dangers of the vaccines.
Hospitals have more motive to keep COVID patients out if hospitals because they make way more with all the other shit they do.
In a lot of countries Hospitals/ government lose a lot of money having patients in hospitals [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Pharma and the gov't have obvious potential motives to exaggerate the risk of Covid. Hospitals had a huge financial incentive to diagnose patients with Covid and put them on ventilators, which also inflated totals. And there are obvious motives to try to hide or downplay potential dangers of the vaccines.
You think hospitals are putting patients on ventilators who don't actually have covid? Motives to hide or downplay vaccine danger? Good grief, dude... [Reply]
