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.”
Just got word a minute ago another one of my employees who tested positive for covid last week has been in the hospital the last 2 days and is in ICU.
He is around 32 years old. and on major oxygen. He lost consciousness at home and his wife had to call an ambulance Monday. He woke up in the hospital.
All these people thinking this is no different than the original variant are dumb as ****. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
It was banned in some states.
HCQ has a long track record of safety and has been FDA-approved for 65 years. In fact, relative to other pharmaceuticals, it's one of the safest.
And there just aren't a lot of studies on HCQ + zinc. But those that exist are promising, and there's plenty of anecdotal evidence.
If their only goal was to promote safe and effective treatments, there was no rational reason to put the hammer down on HCQ/zinc.
If it worked they would use it period, they have no reason to hate HCQ my wife uses it for her patients with RA where it works and those patients also require constant monitoring/blood work etc.. but it also a drug she would never want to take unless she had to and why we avoid countries with high risk of malaria when we travel because the drug has issues with it as well. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
It was in some states. Here's a few examples:
Minnesota’s governor and Board of Pharmacy have taken action to manage the supply of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in the state, and at this time, are not allowing it to be dispensed for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.
On April 2, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey issued executive order 2020-20 which placed restrictions on the prescribing and dispensing of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for use in treating or preventing COVID-19.
On June 15, citing the FDA's revocation of their Emergency Use Authorization for the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to treat COVID-19, the Arkansas Department of Health updated their guidance to indicate that the use of either drug for the treatment of COVID-19 should be avoided in both outpatient and hospital settings.
On April 3, the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services issued an emergency order regulating the prescribing and dispensing of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in the state.
The order prohibits the prescribing or dispensing of prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the prevention of COVID-19, and establishes a quantity limit of 30 days only for patients who were not already established on either medication. Patients already established will not be limited to a 30-day supply.
Because there are lupus patients who need it way more and a supply shock of HCQ would have jeopardized getting critical medicine to those who really need it. And given the costs to the healthcare system they didn't want to introduce new costs for a treatment they don't believe in, let alone negatively impact patient outcomes for ICUs already buried with capacity.
Hospitals got annihilated by this. If they had any confidence in HCQ it would have been implemented pronto. And with all the burned out health care workers, you'd hear way more than a few anecdotes from doctors if they believed it could make their lives less stressful. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
If it worked they would use it period, they have no reason to hate HCQ my wife uses it for her patients with RA where it works and those patients also require constant monitoring/blood work etc.. but it also a drug she would never want to take unless she had too and why we avoid countries with high risk of malaria when we travel because the drug has issues with it as well.
Big Pharma has billions of reasons to discourage its use. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Just got word a minute ago another one of my employees who tested positive for covid last week has been in the hospital the last 2 days and is in ICU.
He is around 32 years old. and on major oxygen. He lost consciousness at home and his wife had to call an ambulance Monday. He woke up in the hospital.
All these people thinking this is no different than the original variant are dumb as ****.
It's hard to believe anyone would think it's not different at this point. It pretty clearly spreads more easily.
I haven't seen anything concrete on the severity (not at all doubting your story, but there were SOME young people who were hit hard before as well), but it wouldn't surprise me if we eventually get a feel soon that it's indeed more severe.
All that said, death rates are still holding somewhat steady. (Sad that we're just kind of used to a pace of ~500/day, but here we are.) [Reply]
There is ample evidence showing that HCQ isn't really that effective for covid. In some cases it even increased mortality. It's been discussed for over a year.
I meant that HCQ channels the zinc into the cells. The point is that both are necessary (the natural supplement quercetin is said to be a good substitute for HCQ also).
Studies focusing on the power of HCQ or CQ alone are worthless and irrelevant. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
I meant that HCQ channels the zinc into the cells. The point is that both are necessary (the natural supplement quercetin is said to be a good substitute for HCQ also).
Studies focusing on the power of HCQ or CQ alone are worthless and irrelevant.
Well you solved the case , a game changer you should run to the nearest ICU and let them know. [Reply]
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
Don't get hating Big Pharma for the vaccine but it is ok to love them for HCQ. I am sure whatever company owns HCQ would have loved it to work so they could have made money.
It always seems like a bit of a hypocrisy - same reason people quote the CDC for some things but say they are full of ish for other things, or spout off about how the FDA hasn't approved the vaccine but then say the FDA is a fraud in other scenarios.
And this happens on both sides. I'm not really sure why people go back to the "protecting others" argument for the vaccine, while knowing full well that everyone has the option to get the vaccine. (I know, I know...variants) [Reply]
