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 carlos3652:
What I think people need to understand also, is the fact that even if you are vaccinated - your immune system might have been good enough to thwart covid without its help.
Hear me out. Vaccines help. No doubt.
But pre vaccine - 40% of infected with covid were Asymptomatic and 80% would get no worse than mild symptoms.
Post vaccine - we learned that 80% are asymptomatic and 95% only suffer mild symptoms …
That shows protection.
That being said. Those same people who have covid who have take. the vaccine could have also been fine without it (assumption based on the numbers above) I can’t prove that obviously due to the fact that we will never know.
I guess my point is that the immune system in your body is badass - and fights off diseases every day and kicks it in the ass.
I think we have lost ourselves when we say that the vaccination is the only way to beat this when most do anyway.
I think the vulnerable and the elderly need it. I just think we are giving too much credit to it when covid existed before vaccines and there was a very high recovery rate and we know it killed off people that were super vulnerable.
Not a vaccine hate post - but also need to add some perspective because I think we have tipped over to the other side of, if you didn’t get a vaccine you are stupid and selfish and should have no rights.
Getting the vaccine also reduces the likelihood that you pass it to an individual who isn't as healthy, or just has the wrong DNA for this virus.
Your take is a pretty narrow view of a multi layered thing. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider: Getting the vaccine also reduces the likelihood that you pass it to an individual who isn't as healthy, or just has the wrong DNA for this virus.
Your take is a pretty narrow view of a multi layered thing.
The bold is not true based on studies that show that vaccinated and unvaccinated have the same viral load. (Pretty sure there was a press conference with Faucci and the CDC where they stated this. maybe I have outdated information and need to read up)
Ill give you my personal example.
90% of my family is vaccinated.
My wife, due to us trying to get pregnant is not. She is a teacher and we are concerned that it will be mandated at some point. If it is, she will take it, and we will probably wait to have kids for a bit.
Based on recommendation from our Dr, we have not taken the vaccine. Our doctor wanted additional studies to come out with regards to safety for pregnancies. Our doctor recommends that we wait for the third trimester if we do get pregnant to get it.
"Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester. Data on neonatal outcomes are based on 724 live-born infants, including 12 sets of multiples."
"Among 827 participants who had a completed pregnancy, the pregnancy resulted in a live birth in 712 (86.1%), in a spontaneous abortion in 104 (12.6%), in stillbirth in 1 (0.1%), and in other outcomes (induced abortion and ectopic pregnancy) in 10 (1.2%)."
So of the 127 participants that were vaccinated prior to the third trimester, 104 of them experienced a loss before week 20.
That told us that we should wait.
Also, do you remember when they announced the JJ had some clotting issues and 6 people were affected. 1 of them was our friend (teacher from school) and we had multiple people who took the JJ (including family) that had bad experiences after they had taken (within weeks of the shot). So the JJ is out for us based on that.
But my parents took the Pfizer which seems very effective. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Getting the vaccine also reduces the likelihood that you pass it to an individual who isn't as healthy, or just has the wrong DNA for this virus.
Your take is a pretty narrow view of a multi layered thing.
Originally Posted by carlos3652:
The bold is not true based on studies that show that vaccinated and unvaccinated have the same viral load. (Pretty sure there was a press conference with Faucci and the CDC where they stated this. maybe I have outdated information and need to read up)
Ill give you my personal example.
90% of my family is vaccinated.
My wife, due to us trying to get pregnant is not. She is a teacher and we are concerned that it will be mandated at some point. If it is, she will take it, and we will probably wait to have kids for a bit.
Based on recommendation from our Dr, we have not taken the vaccine. Our doctor wanted additional studies to come out with regards to safety for pregnancies. Our doctor recommends that we wait for the third trimester if we do get pregnant to get it.
"Data on pregnancy loss are based on 827 participants in the v-safe pregnancy registry who received an mRNA Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2 [Pfizer–BioNTech] or mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) from December 14, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and who reported a completed pregnancy. A total of 700 participants (84.6%) received their first eligible dose in the third trimester. Data on neonatal outcomes are based on 724 live-born infants, including 12 sets of multiples."
"Among 827 participants who had a completed pregnancy, the pregnancy resulted in a live birth in 712 (86.1%), in a spontaneous abortion in 104 (12.6%), in stillbirth in 1 (0.1%), and in other outcomes (induced abortion and ectopic pregnancy) in 10 (1.2%)."
So of the 127 participants that were vaccinated prior to the third trimester, 104 of them experienced a loss before week 20.
That told us that we should wait.
Also, do you remember when they announced the JJ had some clotting issues and 6 people were affected. 1 of them was our friend (teacher from school) and we had multiple people who took the JJ (including family) that had bad experiences after they had taken (within weeks of the shot). So the JJ is out for us based on that.
But my parents took the Pfizer which seems very effective.
In regards to the spreading, if you are protected from ever actually becoming infected, you are going to spread it less. So, yes, vaccinated people will spread the virus less as they are less likely to be infected.
We also know their viral load comes down quicker, so you have less of a window for spread.
There have also been studies that have shown an increased in still born and preterm births from infections with Sars Cov 2, so in the end it's good to weigh that with your doctor.
In terms of the rest of your post, I am very sorry to hear that. I haven't done a whole lot of reading on the J and J shot as it wasn't really available in my area and I don't know of anyone who has gotten it. I know when we have things that touch us personally, it can be hard to look at the entirety of a situation.
I struggled with that with Covid itself as my family had a really difficult time with it, but realize it hasn't been that way across the spectrum. It makes it tough when people who aren't in your situation look down upon it, so to speak. I believe the way we discuss these things these days online or on social media take the humanity out of situations and it's easier to just throw whatever unemotional, non empathetic garbage at each other we feel.
But that's not how we are. I refuse to believe that's humanity.
So I do understand and can relate to your personal feelings towards vaccination. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
Woke up this morning, not feeling the best. Stuffy nose, minor headache. Didn't sleep worth a damn last night.
Went to the pharmacy and bought a rapid test off the shelf for $45. 15 minutes later it tells me I'm negative. I go about my day.
The availability of the rapid antigen tests are wonderful, but $45? C'mon we should be able to do better than that.
We recently bought a bunch from amazon...the abbots were $20 for a 2 pack. We bought 5 boxes since we anticipated needing to do a lot of tests this year (first graders get all kinds of colds and sniffles). [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
In regards to the spreading, if you are protected from ever actually becoming infected, you are going to spread it less. So, yes, vaccinated people will spread the virus less as they are less likely to be infected.
We also know their viral load comes down quicker, so you have less of a window for spread.
There have also been studies that have shown an increased in still born and preterm births from infections with Sars Cov 2, so in the end it's good to weigh that with your doctor.
In terms of the rest of your post, I am very sorry to hear that. I haven't done a whole lot of reading on the J and J shot as it wasn't really available in my area and I don't know of anyone who has gotten it. I know when we have things that touch us personally, it can be hard to look at the entirety of a situation.
I struggled with that with Covid itself as my family had a really difficult time with it, but realize it hasn't been that way across the spectrum. It makes it tough when people who aren't in your situation look down upon it, so to speak. I believe the way we discuss these things these days online or on social media take the humanity out of situations and it's easier to just throw whatever unemotional, non empathetic garbage at each other we feel.
But that's not how we are. I refuse to believe that's humanity.
So I do understand and can relate to your personal feelings towards vaccination.
Yea, I let the professionals do their things... I don't have an issue with people taking the vaccine or not.
What I do not want to get to, is the point where we lose our rights (like in France, Canada, Germany, Israel) to be able to go to a grocery store and buy essentials for my family based on a vaccination status. That does not seem right.
Otherwise. I think Vaccines are great for those that their Dr's recommend. [Reply]
Originally Posted by carlos3652:
Yea, I let the professionals do their things... I don't have an issue with people taking the vaccine or not.
What I do not want to get to, is the point where we lose our rights (like in France, Canada, Germany, Israel) to be able to go to a grocery store and buy essentials for my family based on a vaccination status. That does not seem right.
Otherwise. I think Vaccines are great for those that their Dr's recommend.
I don't think it will get to that point, nor should it here.
It may be mandated by businesses or something, which I'm not exactly sure how I feel about, depending on the area of work etc. [Reply]
I don't understand how protecting your neighbor became a political argument.
Maybe you are confident you'd be fine and get through covid. But what about every single person you come in contact with?
If everybody gets the vaccine, then we can all get on with our lives as relatively normal.
Without it, ICU's are full and not only are people dying of covid, but there's not adequate resources for ANYONE who needs medical care for any reason due to the massive burden on the medical sector.
Just get the damned shot. We live in a society. We interact with each other. Rugged individualism, yeah, yeah-but you don't exist in a vacuum. Why is such a small thing to do such a problem? Is a couple of shots (or just one even) so much to ask to not kill the greeter at Wal-Mart? Or the lady in front of you in line at the gas station? Or her spouse who's a cancer patient?
Why do people not understand that it's not all about YOU. It's about everyone you come in contact with, and everyone they come in contact with and so on and so on.
Originally Posted by loochy:
We recently bought a bunch from amazon...the abbots were $20 for a 2 pack. We bought 5 boxes since we anticipated needing to do a lot of tests this year (first graders get all kinds of colds and sniffles).
The Abbott's BinaxNOW's are sold out all over town. Nothing but empty display cases. Ended up buying the Ellume test. Didn't realize these tests had such high accuracy ratings. Pretty impressive. [Reply]
I thought this article in the NY Times was a good read. In short, the messaging on all of this continues to kind of suck. Places are reinstating mask mandates when the reality is, if you're vaccinated, you have very, very little to be worried about.
“How small are the chances of the average vaccinated American contracting Covid?” @DLeonhardt writes in The Morning newsletter. “Probably about one in 5,000 per day.”
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I thought this article in the NY Times was a good read. In short, the messaging on all of this continues to kind of suck. Places are reinstating mask mandates when the reality is, if you're vaccinated, you have very, very little to be worried about.
“How small are the chances of the average vaccinated American contracting Covid?” @DLeonhardt writes in The Morning newsletter. “Probably about one in 5,000 per day.”
Well yeah, but the mask mandates are an attempt to protect the unvaccinated, which is incredibly frustrating because they don't seem to care enough to protect themselves by and large.
Meanwhile, I'm dissolving my small production company next month and selling off all the equipment for pennies on the dollar because the plague has now cost me two years of work.