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 Halfcan:
More condescending nonsense. You have no idea my situation or what I have been studying as far as the Vax. I am bombarded with opinions every day whether I want them or not. Most are ignorant suppositions like yours. Others are from Vax shamers like Pitt and Beauford who think they have some higher ground to be assholes to people with different opinions or ask questions.
Sorry i snapped but the information you were asking for has been posted/talked about already multiple times in multiple threads and has been pretty available from hospital/healthcare providers for a while now , so you asking about again made it sound like you just ignored first few hundred times .
As far a reactions go my son who has reaction mostly mild with the flu shot had just small injection site pain for few days and both kids had less arm pain with their second shots. [Reply]
first, we start here. this is the likelihood you wind up in hospital from covid by age. it’s almost certainly overstated by 30-50% as most “cases” were in hospital not for covid and the diagnosis was incidental. the journal “hospital pediatrics” estimates overcounting to be 40% of total.
but let’s give them benefit of doubt and count them all. it won’t affect the outcome.
from 5-17, hospitalization is 0.0106% of the population. basically, 1 per 10,000
from 18-29 it’s 0.0785% of the population. about 8 per 10,000.
these are very low rates and most had serious immunological problems or comorbidities. you can probably lop a zero off this for healthy kids. but, again, let’s be maximum charitable.
now, let’s look at vaccines, because this does NOT look favorable. (all DATA direct from CDC and their own presentation. download it before they memory hole it.)
we see that second dose of vaccine for 12-15 years is 0.2% hospitalization. it’s not a perfect comp to the above data because the age cohorts do not line up exactly, but it’s going to be 15-20X the hospitalization rate no matter how you slice it.
let that sink in. mRNA vaccination was at basically 20X as likely to put a 12-15 year old in hospital than getting actual covid.
and that was the old covid, not the new, much milder delta variant. vs delta, this is probably more like a 200X variance.
see now why i did not care about being charitable?
this is a lay down hand.
for 16-25, again, it’s 0.2% hospitalization from vaccine so we’re on the order of 3X the risk of hospitalization from getting actual covid and ~30X that of delta variant.
this is NOT a case for vaccination. it’s a case to knock this off immediately.
even one dose was 0.1% hospitalization rates and this likely means the 2nd dose figure is too low. how many kids who got hospitalized on D1 never went on to getting D2 out of caution? that would be a useful number to know. this could be additive.
hell, ~25% of these kids were so sick from the vaccine they could not undertake normal daily activities vs a disease that was what, 70-90% asymptomatic or barely symptomatic in adults?
this is not treatment, it’s assault.
and some of these reactions are SEVERE, especially, for some reason, among boys. myocarditis can kill you or do permanent heart damage.
Originally Posted by Monticore:
Sorry i snapped but the information you were asking for has been posted/talked about already multiple times in multiple threads and has been pretty available from hospital/healthcare providers for a while now , so you asking about again made it sound like you just ignored first few hundred times .
As far a reactions go my son who has reaction mostly mild with the flu shot had just small injection site pain for few days and both kids had less arm pain with their second shots.
My 13 year old nephew didn't have any issue. I think the worst reaction was my mom had a fever after her first shot but no issue on her 2nd moderna. [Reply]
Cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescents and young adults have been reported more often after getting the second dose than after the first dose of one of these two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. These reports are rare and the known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks, including the possible risk of myocarditis or pericarditis. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Yes, better to just accept the press releases directly from the drug companies.
No reason to look at the CDC's own data.
Everyone has their own chambers to echo, I suppose.
That person's writing clearly shows his bias and ax to grind.... and those types of articles are routinely shot down by people who put the effort into doing so, but I think most have given up even reading by now.
And OTOH, I read a headline last night along the lines of "toddler flown 150 miles due to all ICUs in Houston being full" ....then read the article to see a quote saying the particular hospital usually has 3-5 kid ICU cases at a time and they've been at 7-10 lately, and hinted that other hospitals in the area are almost at capacity.
So yeah, the truth usually lies in the middle.... those who call the latter article "fear porn" need to realize the other extreme ("freedum porn"?) isn't any more useful. They're just two sides of the same coin. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Everyone has their own chambers to echo, I suppose.
That person's writing clearly shows his bias and ax to grind.... and those types of articles are routinely shot down by people who put the effort into doing so, but I think most have given up even reading by now.
And OTOH, I read a headline last night along the lines of "toddler flown 150 miles due to all ICUs in Houston being full" ....then read the article to see a quote saying the particular hospital usually has 3-5 kid ICU cases at a time and they've been at 7-10 lately, and hinted that other hospitals in the area are almost at capacity.
So yeah, the truth usually lies in the middle.... those who call the latter article "fear porn" need to realize the other extreme ("freedum porn"?) isn't any more useful. They're just two sides of the same coin.
I was looking for some info on Dr Zelenko the other day and found this random website after reading for a bit you could tell the site was a bit sketchy so even though it was kind of confirming my own thoughts I completely dismissed the article , i had the same feeling reading this article. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
Everyone has their own chambers to echo, I suppose.
That person's writing clearly shows his bias and ax to grind.... and those types of articles are routinely shot down by people who put the effort into doing so, but I think most have given up even reading by now.
And OTOH, I read a headline last night along the lines of "toddler flown 150 miles due to all ICUs in Houston being full" ....then read the article to see a quote saying the particular hospital usually has 3-5 kid ICU cases at a time and they've been at 7-10 lately, and hinted that other hospitals in the area are almost at capacity.
So yeah, the truth usually lies in the middle.... those who call the latter article "fear porn" need to realize the other extreme ("freedum porn"?) isn't any more useful. They're just two sides of the same coin.
I believe the author has been pro-vaccine for high-risk people but has been less enthusiastic about a mass-vaccination program. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
first, we start here. this is the likelihood you wind up in hospital from covid by age. it’s almost certainly overstated by 30-50% as most “cases” were in hospital not for covid and the diagnosis was incidental. the journal “hospital pediatrics” estimates overcounting to be 40% of total.
but let’s give them benefit of doubt and count them all. it won’t affect the outcome.
from 5-17, hospitalization is 0.0106% of the population. basically, 1 per 10,000
from 18-29 it’s 0.0785% of the population. about 8 per 10,000.
these are very low rates and most had serious immunological problems or comorbidities. you can probably lop a zero off this for healthy kids. but, again, let’s be maximum charitable.
now, let’s look at vaccines, because this does NOT look favorable. (all DATA direct from CDC and their own presentation. download it before they memory hole it.)
we see that second dose of vaccine for 12-15 years is 0.2% hospitalization. it’s not a perfect comp to the above data because the age cohorts do not line up exactly, but it’s going to be 15-20X the hospitalization rate no matter how you slice it.
let that sink in. mRNA vaccination was at basically 20X as likely to put a 12-15 year old in hospital than getting actual covid.
and that was the old covid, not the new, much milder delta variant. vs delta, this is probably more like a 200X variance.
see now why i did not care about being charitable?
this is a lay down hand.
for 16-25, again, it’s 0.2% hospitalization from vaccine so we’re on the order of 3X the risk of hospitalization from getting actual covid and ~30X that of delta variant.
this is NOT a case for vaccination. it’s a case to knock this off immediately.
even one dose was 0.1% hospitalization rates and this likely means the 2nd dose figure is too low. how many kids who got hospitalized on D1 never went on to getting D2 out of caution? that would be a useful number to know. this could be additive.
hell, ~25% of these kids were so sick from the vaccine they could not undertake normal daily activities vs a disease that was what, 70-90% asymptomatic or barely symptomatic in adults?
this is not treatment, it’s assault.
and some of these reactions are SEVERE, especially, for some reason, among boys. myocarditis can kill you or do permanent heart damage.
Those were not hospitalization rates, those were rates of emergency department/hospital visits. Unless you are assuming every patient in the emergency department gets admitted to the hospital, which they don’t. I have worked in emergency departments, and can promise you that many of those ED visits were for non serious side effects.
If you look at the VAERS data from the CDC link referenced:
In the 12-15 year age group there were 144 serious adverse events in 6 million doses. This is .0024% or .000024
In the 16-25 age group there were 790 serious adverse events out of 21.6 million doses. This is .003657% or .00003657
Please don’t take what your read at face value, especially considering your source of data interpretation. [Reply]
Cases of myocarditis and pericarditis in adolescents and young adults have been reported more often after getting the second dose than after the first dose of one of these two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. These reports are rare and the known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks, including the possible risk of myocarditis or pericarditis.
You are jumping to something else. The article I posted was noting the risk of hospitalization is greater from the shot than Covid in the young according to the CDC's own data.
There also have been numerous articles showing how the CDC is deliberately obfuscating risks with adverse affects.
Needless to say, I don't trust the CDC as they are simply an extension of the Pharmaceutical companies. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
I believe the author has been pro-vaccine for high-risk people but has been less enthusiastic about a mass-vaccination program.
Some people say things like that to add more weight to their argument but can be hard to prove. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
You are jumping to something else. The article I posted was noting the risk of hospitalization is greater from the shot than Covid in the young according to the CDC's own data.
There also have been numerous articles showing how the CDC is deliberately obfuscating risks with adverse affects.
Needless to say, I don't trust the CDC as they are simply an extension of the Pharmaceutical companies.
You don't trust the CDC but you trust their data, what about Heath Canada or or all the other entities that are recommending it , why do you trust that one guy from that one website trying to make a name for himself over them? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Monticore:
You don't trust the CDC but you trust their data, what about Heath Canada or or all the other entities that are recommending it , why do you trust that one guy from that one website trying to make a name for himself over them?
That was always my point as well. I don't necessarily trust CDC numbers, but I REALLY don't trust numbers from random internet guys. [Reply]