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 Marcellus:
Im going to have to disagree. You can be a carrier and not be "sick". Being asymptomatic is the definition of not being sick at least where it comes to a virus I would think.
You would think wrong. It means showing no symptoms. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Im going to have to disagree. You can be a carrier and not be "sick". Being asymptomatic is the definition of not being sick at least where it comes to a virus I would think.
ummmm no.
asymptomatic just means they show no symptoms of being sick, not that they dont have it.
thats why they talk about asymptomatic carriers quite often...
i would think everyone would know this at this point.
Originally Posted by petegz28:
8,400+ new cases already in NY today.....
So now there are self-selection/inherent bias factors to consider, are there not?
So I think we can agree that the most vulnerable populations get hit first and hardest, right? So you figure those populations are going to see significant spikes in hospitalization rates.
Now we may be getting into what I would consider a necessary 'buffer' population. People with stronger immune systems who may either 1) fight off instances of exposure a time or two or 2) simply take longer to manifest symptoms that would yield testing.
So one would hope that later waves of infections might be people who are better equipped to handle them. That wave would then hopefully have lower rates of hospitalization.
It's either that or the admission rates remain a significant lagging indicator and what we're seeing right now is just a brief downturn before another surge up. Which would be damn unfortunate. If it's the former, we're getting into 'productive' confirmed cases a little bit. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
If you have been infected with Covid, never experience any symptoms, your body basically fights it off, you were never sick.
By your criteria most people are sick in some way shape or form every day.
but you can still transmit it to others. thats the problem [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I think the quibble here is the difference between being "infected" and being "sick", which are not the same thing.
Either way I'm done with the topic its just semantics and I am not Donger.
well i'm pretty sure this is in reference to BRC saying those poeple arent sick on the boats because they are asymptomatic, which has nothing to do with whether they can get people sick in florida.
an infected person can transmit it. sick/ infected are pretty much interchangeable in this scenario IMO [Reply]
Originally Posted by SAUTO:
but you can still transmit it to others. thats the problem
This reminds me of HPV......a huge portion of the population has it, doesn't know they have it and freely give it to others, but at least you actually have to fuck to spread that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by SAUTO:
well i'm pretty sure this is in reference to BRC saying those poeple arent sick on the boats because they are asymptomatic, which has nothing to do with whether they can get people sick in florida.
an infected person can transmit it. sick/ infected are pretty much interchangeable in this scenario IMO
Yeah, the argument is whether they can go about their daily lives just because they aren't showing symptoms... and the answer is no, because without being tested, you don't know if they're carriers and possibly contagious. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
It's not rocket science. Yes, some people are going to wear them incorrectly. People will reuse them. People will touch their faces sometimes. Taking all of that into account. If EVERYONE wore masks out in public and gatherings, it would GREATLY mitigate the spread of this virus. It would be a gigantic preventative measure and maybe, just maybe, we could actually, do shit once this starts to die down.
Even if everyone wore JUST wore a scarf over their faces, it would still HELP.
Anything over a face, a mouth, eyes will HELP. Some help more than others. Some things like N95 masks REALLY help.
It's a staple in asian cultures and and it has been shown to significantly mitigate transmission, even when the average joe wears them.
I agree , I think it will come to that sooner rather than later. I believe availability is the only thing keeping them from recommending it right now, my wife can't even get any for her office right now . [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Yeah, the argument is whether they can go about their daily lives just because they aren't showing symptoms... and the answer is no, because without being tested, you don't know if they're carriers and possibly contagious.
They may be contagious even after the symptoms have come and gone as well so even "recovered" could pose a risk. [Reply]
