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 RaidersOftheCellar:
The most-educated members of society being the least likely to take the vaccine fits the narrative?
So you think PhD's are somehow the ones to follow? Those with Masters degrees have the lowest vaccine hesitancy.
Based on the swath of people I've met with each level of education, I'll go with what those with Masters are doing. They have the most common sense between the two groups. [Reply]
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
So you think PhD's are somehow the ones to follow? Those with Masters degrees have the lowest vaccine hesitancy.
Based on the swath of people I've met with each level of education, I'll go with what those with Masters are doing. They have the most common sense between the two groups.
So you're saying that people somehow lose their common sense when they earn their PhD?
Btw, it doesn't take any "common sense" to be a follower who buys into a massive marketing campaign. It takes common sense to be skeptical and cautious. [Reply]
jjjayb 08-17-2021, 08:03 AM
This message has been deleted by jjjayb.
Reason: dupe
Originally Posted by Fish:
It doesn't necessarily matter which exact months it covers. The vaccines have proven to be an incredible success across the board, and it's pretty silly to deny it at this point.
Wow. And you try to put off like you're the smart one in the room? It doesn't matter which months you look at? Really? So if you include the data from when the vaccine wasn't readily available and most people weren't vaccinated you don't think it skews the numbers? Have you looked at deaths of vaccinated vs unvaccinated for recent months? Of course you haven't because you wouldn't be saying that if you did.
I shared this in the other post. I'll share it again here.
When you look at just one of the charts in the picture above, I understand why you would think most deaths are in the unvaccinated. Clearly there are more vaccinated deaths according to just one of those charts by itself. Now look at the dates. They are measuring back to December when most weren't vaccinated. However, if you compare the charts from one week to the next you can see what the newest data is. You'll see that CURRENTLY just as many vaccinated are dying as non-vaccinated. The numbers don't lie. Just the people that report them. The graphic like the one I originally commented on bothers me because vox made an intentional decision to not show what months they were including. If they did the same graphic, but only using data from last month it wouldn't look anything like the graphic they published. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jjjayb:
Wow. And you try to put off like you're the smart one in the room? It doesn't matter which months you look at? Really? So if you include the data from when the vaccine wasn't available you don't think it skews the numbers? Have you looked at deaths of vaccinated vs unvaccinated for recent months? Of course you haven't because you wouldn't be saying that it doesn't matter if you did.
I shared this in the other post. I'll share it again here.
When you look at just one of the images there I would understand why you would think most deaths are in the unvaccinated. Clearly there are more vaccinated deaths according to the chart. Now look at the dates. They are measuring back to December when most weren't vaccinated. However, if you compare week to week, so you can see what the comparisons are for just recent months while the vaccine has been readily available, you'll see that just as many vaccinated are dying as non-vaccinated. The numbers don't lie. Just the people that report them.
Indeed. Good work.
Unfortunately, they'll never budge, no matter how many facts you bombard them with. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Indeed. Good work.
Unfortunately, they'll never budge, no matter how many facts you bombard them with.
I don't care if they budge. They can believe what they want. They can get the vaccine if they want. Good for them. What I'm tired of is these people looking down at people that don't feel like taking the vaccine is right for them. Acting like we're uneducated inbred hillbillies.
I've weighed the pros and cons. I've looked at my chances, as a healthy man under the age of 60, of dying from Covid. I've looked at my chances of succumbing to the current known side effects of the vaccine. I've looked at the possibility of dealing with unknown long term side effects that may not be discovered until the vaccines have been around for a while. In the end, it was my decision. Now leave me the hell alone about it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jjjayb:
Wow. And you try to put off like you're the smart one in the room? It doesn't matter which months you look at? Really? So if you include the data from when the vaccine wasn't readily available and most people weren't vaccinated you don't think it skews the numbers? Have you looked at deaths of vaccinated vs unvaccinated for recent months? Of course you haven't because you wouldn't be saying that if you did.
I shared this in the other post. I'll share it again here.
When you look at just one of the charts in the picture above, I understand why you would think most deaths are in the unvaccinated. Clearly there are more vaccinated deaths according to just one of those charts by itself. Now look at the dates. They are measuring back to December when most weren't vaccinated. However, if you compare the charts from one week to the next you can see what the newest data is. You'll see that CURRENTLY just as many vaccinated are dying as non-vaccinated. The numbers don't lie. Just the people that report them. The graphic like the one I originally commented on bothers me because vox made an intentional decision to not show what months they were including. If they did the same graphic, but only using data from last month it wouldn't look anything like the graphic they published.
As more people get vaccinated, more cases will happen in vaccinated people. Same with deaths. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jjjayb:
I don't care if they budge. They can believe what they want. They can get the vaccine if they want. Good for them. What I'm tired of is these people looking down at people that don't feel like taking the vaccine is right for them. Acting like we're uneducated inbred hillbillies.
I've weighed the pros and cons. I've looked at my chances, as a healthy man under the age of 60, of dying from Covid. I've looked at my chances of succumbing to the current known side effects of the vaccine. I've looked at the possibility of dealing with unknown long term side effects that may not be discovered until the vaccines have been around for a while. In the end, it was my decision. Now leave me the hell alone about it.
“The vaccines don’t work- look at Iceland.” Alright, let’s do it.
Cases were at record highs due to Delta, however, 97% of Iceland’s vaccinated cases are MILD or have NO symptoms. In addition, the nation has NOT recorded a SINGLE COVID-19 death since May.
I'm pointing out the unhealthy penchant to continue propagating a horrible premise that isn't within a million miles of "unity" ....that you and others have employed during most of this 'pandemic'
You're just the opposite side of the same coin that you despise so much. You stop by every morning to take a dump on the thread with no intention of anything that resembles intelligent conversation. You completely ignore any halfway rational response to your trolling, but jump to the chance to sling more shit when we return serve.
And you've somehow gone 18 months without budging on your first conclusion that it's just the flu and there's no pandemic, etc.... which again, is just the opposite side of those who are extreme the other way.
Except, you treat everyone like they're on the other end of the spectrum and there's no one here who's in between (and yes, there are). Just like you interpreted my post as "seeking approval", because apparently throughout the several times we've met in person, I've always happened to ride in on my high horse and have been a judgemental asshole... when in fact that it was much simpler than that and goes for all Covid talk despite personal beliefs.
So, I'm really not sure why you're still around in this thread or why we shouldn't just boot you, because you've purposefully done nothing besides try to stir shit for months with zero actual insight or content, which is the definition of a troll. [Reply]
Originally Posted by jjjayb:
I don't care if they budge. They can believe what they want. They can get the vaccine if they want. Good for them. What I'm tired of is these people looking down at people that don't feel like taking the vaccine is right for them. Acting like we're uneducated inbred hillbillies.
I've weighed the pros and cons. I've looked at my chances, as a healthy man under the age of 60, of dying from Covid. I've looked at my chances of succumbing to the current known side effects of the vaccine. I've looked at the possibility of dealing with unknown long term side effects that may not be discovered until the vaccines have been around for a while. In the end, it was my decision. Now leave me the hell alone about it.
IMO, the only issue is when people want their personal freedom of choice, which works perfectly good in a vacuum, while giving no shits about how their personal choices impact other people (and their freedom of choice).
It's one thing to say you're uncomfortable with getting the vaccine, but still being cognizant of the fact that you could still end up in an overcrowded hospital or spreading it pre-symptomatically (the latest I've read is asymptotically isn't a big issue), so masking up and not going to large indoor gatherings, etc.
.....and it's another thing to completely ignore the issue, potentially spread it, and expect a hospital bed if you do end up needing one.
Like you said, it is about checking off risk factors, for yourself and others... I just learned someone who's 65 and has been taking care of a 94 year old, and has a 90yo parent, and works in a hospital.... isn't vaccinated, and the only logic I've heard is "not living in fear". That's a lot of risk factors to completely ignore without good reasoning.
And the truth is there are a lot of people out there like that, who really don't have a good reason. [Reply]
Booster shots for ye olden Pfizer vaccine expected by October. Possibly for other vaccines too? 8 months after you finish your second dose from what I've read this AM. [Reply]
