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 Demonpenz:
I don't have a clue either. I just mean if you are actively fighting the vax it seems a bit retarded at this point. This shit is going to drag on forever.
Okay so I guess the "you" in your original response was directed towards the guy on the ventilator.
It sucks but he's from another country and I guess is fearful of vaccines in general. It's a sad deal to see so much unnecessary suffering and death for sure. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Demonpenz:
I don't have a clue either. I just mean if you are actively fighting the vax it seems a bit retarded at this point. This shit is going to drag on forever.
"Retarded" for being skeptical of the two outlets shoveling the info on the vaccine?
I'd say you would have to be "retarded" not to be skeptical.
This is not a statement on the vaccine itself but the history of the two outlets responsible for broadcasting the information. Constant lying tends to build skepticism.
You can make of forum bet with GoChiefs if you like. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Otter:
"Retarded" for being skeptical of the two outlets shoveling the info on the vaccine?
I'd say you would have to be "retarded" not to be skeptical.
This is not a statement on the vaccine itself but the history of the two outlets responsible for broadcasting the information. Constant lying tends to build skepticism.
You can make of forum bet with GoChiefs if you like.
If it's not 100% clear to you that the vaccines are wildly successful at this point, that's well beyond skepticism. It's not like we're lacking data at this point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
If it's not 100% clear to you that the vaccines are wildly successful at this point, that's well beyond skepticism. It's not like we're lacking data at this point.
"This is not a statement on the vaccine itself but the history of the two outlets responsible for broadcasting the information." [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Okay, so if those two outlets broadcast that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, you would be skeptical of that too. That makes sense. Effective use of your limited ability to think critically.
I guess the point I'm not making clearly is that media and the government have given very good reason to not trust 100% of what they broadcast. I find it very acceptable for a rational person to be cautious and to question what these two entities portray.
I'll try a Venn Diagram.
If that does not illustrate my point clearly I politely concede and goose in line step without forethought.
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
At this point, the refusal by so many to just get the damned vaccine has wiped out a second year of performing and event work for me.
I give up.
I'm vaccinated. Pfizer. Both shots.
What I am pointing out is one of the bottlenecks in why many people aren't vaccinated.
It's a reality of the situation no matter how unpopular. Actions have actions have consequences. Much like when 'they' say people who don't get vaccinated deserve what 'they' get.
When you lie at convivence it tends to build. Everyone that I've talked to who doesn't have the vaccination doesn't trust the the outlets providing the information and for very good reason.
Much like I said I'm walking away from this thread. Lies tend to carry. I would never tell anyone not to get vaccinated but the distrust that has accumulated is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration.
Originally Posted by Otter:
"This is not a statement on the vaccine itself but the history of the two outlets responsible for broadcasting the information."
Why are people getting their medical advice from news entertainment news outlets? [Reply]
Imagine a world where leadership had a clear vision and other leaders fell in line with the messaging, even if they didn't agree with it, for the sake of clear and direct recommendations and guidance... and the media followed suit. And not for the sake of agendas and propaganda, but "this is what we know, this is the course of action we're taking, and we'll adjust as we get more info" /mic drop. [Reply]
Actually had a very intelligent conversation the other day with someone who isn't vaccinated yet. There was a little bit of "freedom to make my own medical decisions" to talk through, but they also have a medical history that is a risk factor, plus questions about starting a family (the CDC fully admits there isn't much data on pregnancies, but the medical history also plays a role in that)... they also found it a bit concerning that a lot of what they read was slanted towards "not much has been studied on xyz, but just get the shot anyway", but they had clearly done a lot of research. They have also had Covid (and a positive test).
It was very a very refreshing conversation with someone who wasn't simply being stubborn about it or swept up in the bullshit and was open to getting it at some point. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Imagine a world where leadership had a clear vision and other leaders fell in line with the messaging, even if they didn't agree with it, for the sake of clear and direct recommendations and guidance... and the media followed suit. And not for the sake of agendas and propaganda, but "this is what we know, this is the course of action we're taking, and we'll adjust as we get more info" /mic drop.
That would be boring and probably not as financially lucrative.
If you watch Canadian nightly /local news it’s boring as shit just facts/numbers all same messaging not opinions or commentary from the anchors thats why most some end up watching CNN or FOX even up here . [Reply]
Originally Posted by Otter:
I'm vaccinated. Pfizer. Both shots.
What I am pointing out is one of the bottlenecks in why many people aren't vaccinated.
It's a reality of the situation no matter how unpopular. Actions have actions have consequences. Much like when 'they' say people who don't get vaccinated deserve what 'they' get.
When you lie at convivence it tends to build. Everyone that I've talked to who doesn't have the vaccination doesn't trust the the outlets providing the information and for very good reason.
Much like I said I'm walking away from this thread. Lies tend to carry. I would never tell anyone not to get vaccinated but the distrust that has accumulated is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration.
Now, this time I'll leave this thread?
See how it works?
Hey, cut that shit out. Dissenting opinions and skepticism aren’t even allowed from medical professionals. Who do you think you are? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Hey, cut that shit out. Dissenting opinions and skepticism aren’t even allowed from medical professionals. Who do you think you are?
Otter shared logical, reasonable thoughts. You mostly sound like an idiot because your ideology controls you so much that you can't listen to reason. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Actually had a very intelligent conversation the other day with someone who isn't vaccinated yet. There was a little bit of "freedom to make my own medical decisions" to talk through, but they also have a medical history that is a risk factor, plus questions about starting a family (the CDC fully admits there isn't much data on pregnancies, but the medical history also plays a role in that)... they also found it a bit concerning that a lot of what they read was slanted towards "not much has been studied on xyz, but just get the shot anyway", but they had clearly done a lot of research. They have also had Covid (and a positive test).
It was very a very refreshing conversation with someone who wasn't simply being stubborn about it or swept up in the bullshit and was open to getting it at some point.
Is that person masking currently then to try and protect themselves/others or just doing business as usual. [Reply]