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 Rain Man:
Denver's restaurants are now closed for eight weeks to dine-in, but they're open for takeout. If you consider the risks of 30 seconds of takeout contact versus being in a grocery store for 30 minutes, takeout might actually be more secure. But dump the food out of the wrappers and containers before you eat.
At least, that's my thinking. Maybe I'm wrong, but the wife and I decided that we'd go do takeout on occasion during the eight weeks.
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
Denver's restaurants are now closed for eight weeks to dine-in, but they're open for takeout. If you consider the risks of 30 seconds of takeout contact versus being in a grocery store for 30 minutes, takeout might actually be more secure. But dump the food out of the wrappers and containers before you eat.
At least, that's my thinking. Maybe I'm wrong, but the wife and I decided that we'd go do takeout on occasion during the eight weeks.
I guess I'm worried about people coughing on my food once it's about done being cooked the most. [Reply]
Still am leery of takeout, mostly due to food quality when places are quiet and not necessarily from virus concerns, but a place near us that we like is matching any curbside pickup order from them with a gift card for the same amount. Seems too good to be true but I'll likely use the gift card to dine in and order 2 more drinks than I normally would. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
5300 posts brother - I ain't finding 'em all.
But I know oakland hater has and a couple other people have responded to suggestions of 'a national lockdown' with some version of 'extreme times, extreme measures...' If you don't believe there are several people in this thread (and honestly, I'm sure you're one of them) who are calling for martial law without realizing that's what they're calling for, I don't know what to tell you.
Again I ask you - what do you believe a 'national lockdown' is? A federally mandated, federally enforced edict from the government ordering you to stay in your homes.
Do you think the federal government has police powers? Don't answer, I'll just tell you - they don't. The Constitution does not grant the Federal Government the right to patrol the streets enforcing measures for the public health. That is specifically reserved to the states and that order (or enforcement) cannot by law come from on high. In order for the federal government to actively involve itself, they effectively HAVE to declare martial law.
If you can find a mechanism to enforce a national shutdown WITHOUT the imposition of martial law, I'd like to hear it. Within the boundaries of our Constitution, the most the federal government can do is encourage states to do it on their own (though they could tie federal aid to it if they wanted). If they attempt to do more than that, they would essentially have to suspend the Constitution.
I'm not going to get into politics in this thread for obvious reasons.
I don't have a problem admitting I indirectly advocated martial law. These are extreme circumstances and therefore extreme measures must be taken.
But I think you have to admit that people going out right now to bars, restaurants etc. and acting like there isn't a virus spreading that we current have no vaccine for is a little irresponsible and selfish. Something you failed to do in your post. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
My worry is how quickly this overton window is shifting and how obviously that kind of thinking yields an even faster shift.
We have people in this very thread advocating martial law. Literal boots on the ground and ordering people back into their homes (and folks, the implication in that is gunpoint because how else does one compel adherence in a situation that dire?)
And it's worse on social media. People requesting genuinely authoritarian measures. And the problem with that is you have maybe 4-6 weeks of runway before this population (which is absolutely more defiant of...everyone...than pretty much any population in the world) looks around and says "y'know what, 80% of us aren't going to be impacted by this at all and we suddenly have troops in the streets ordering us into our homes? Fuck. This."
We can't just say "there's no such things as 'too much'" because it ignores the relatively near-term consequences. People will burn out on it. At that point you have one of 2 outcomes - people start ignoring directives outright or those directives becomes more and more harshly enforced (the former being more likely than the latter, which could easily serve to do more harm than good and simply push your 'spike' out a month or so).
Yes, you CAN do too much here. And to sit there and say "oh well, if it turns out we overreacted I guess we'll never know..." is to preemptively insulate yourself from ANY criticisms for decisions made that absolutely could've been hugely damaging to this nation. When concede that type of thinking, it gives decision-makers a pass and again, leads to the decision-lens ratcheting in only a single direction, towards ever increasing draconian measures. The overton window just continues to slide and slide and slide until 'normal' is "well at least they aren't making us execute our pets like Chernobyl. This is fine...."
I'm not saying that we should err on the side of caution, but we damn sure shouldn't just accept leaders going out there and saying "if we overreact...oh well...."
That's not acceptable either.
Yeah, the boredom and economic peril of a huge dispersed population with mostly minimal symptoms is going to boil over eventually.
Sometimes the hardest instructions for a can-do society is 'don't do.' [Reply]
Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy:
I'm not going to get into politics in this thread for obvious reasons.
I don't have a problem admitting I indirectly advocated martial law. These are extreme circumstances and therefore extreme measures must be taken.
But I think you have to admit that people going out right now to bars, restaurants etc. and acting like there isn't a virus spreading that we current have no vaccine for is a little irresponsible and selfish. Something you failed to do in your post.
Except for when I said "just carrying on with your daily life like nothing is happening will get you shot in the chest instead of the back. This is here, things are different, act like it."
Of course I have said that there are people who are being irresponsible and selfish. There are ALWAYS people who are irresponsible and selfish. Everywhere. The answer for that is the same as it is for everyone that's being an asshole, you publicly shame them until they stop. And frankly, that requires public buy in. And if you want to lose that buy-in, just keep getting more and more extreme for longer and longer. See where that takes you.
But no, for a disease that will leave 80% of the infected unharmed (and thus likely 90% of the population), I'm not going to say "extreme measures must be taken" and start talking about putting troops on American soil to enforce federal mandates. That's batshit insane and its born of the very "well it's simply impossible for us to overreact" mindset that has taken over for far too many people. [Reply]