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 loochy:
I was thinking more of the insurance companies. It's fine if you don't want to wear a helmet, but they can now decline head-trauma related coverage.
It's a choice you make, so alright.
That's a great idea that in no way will lead to insurance companies fighting and attempting in to deny coverage for people with traumatic brain injuries that were incurred in numerous other ways. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
That's a great idea that in no way will lead to insurance companies fighting and attempting in to deny coverage for people with traumatic brain injuries that were incurred in numerous other ways.
But we all trust insurance companies to do the right thing. [Reply]
So if I'm reading thru all this right, it looks like we really need the JJ vaccine to have great results for us to have enough to vaccinate everyone that wants it by late winter/spring. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
So if I'm reading thru all this right, it looks like we really need the JJ vaccine to have great results for us to have enough to vaccinate everyone that wants it by late winter/spring.
I don't know if theirs will even ben ready by then. [Reply]
JUST IN: Moderna's Covid-19 vaccine is 94% effective at preventing illness and appears to protect against infection as well, documents released Tuesday morning say. https://t.co/V3VrNN40UW
2 more vaccine developers could seek FDA's green light by February
This would mean the U.S. would have four Covid-19 vaccines available — including the first vaccine to only require one shot.
The Trump administration anticipates two more vaccine developers could seek FDA authorization for their shots by the end of February.
That would mean the U.S. would have four Covid-19 vaccines available — including the first vaccine to only require one shot — to meet its goal of immunizing 100 million people by the end of March.
The timeline: The first results from Johnson & Johnson's late-stage U.S. trial could come in the beginning of January, said Moncef Slaoui, the chief adviser to Operation Warp Speed, at a Monday press conference. By late January, the company could have enough safety data to submit an application to FDA for emergency use.
Johnson & Johnson cut its enrollment in its last-stage clinical trial from 60,000 to 40,000 because the virus is so widespread that data on efficacy is coming in faster than the company expected. J&J has so far enrolled more than 42,000 people and will stop recruiting participants later this week, Slaoui said.
The vaccine is the only one among the frontrunners that is given as a single dose. “Because it’s a one dose vaccine, they can really scale up very quickly,” Slaoui said.
The first efficacy readout of AstraZeneca’s vaccine could come in the second half of January, Slaoui estimated, and the company could potentially file for emergency use later in February.
AstraZeneca has already released data from a mix of late-stage clinical trials, showing that the standard two-dose vaccine was 62 percent effective. A lower dose paired with a standard-strength second-dose was 90 percent effective. That finding was the result of an error impacting a small group of trial participants.
On Friday night, the FDA authorized the first vaccine for emergency use from Pfizer. Federal health officials expect the second, for Moderna’s shot, could come later this week.
Why it matters: Coronavirus vaccines are the key to ending the pandemic, and authorizing more for emergency use could help ramp up availability. The first shots went into arms Monday, as the U.S. gears up for its most complex vaccination quest in history. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
So if I'm reading thru all this right, it looks like we really need the JJ vaccine to have great results for us to have enough to vaccinate everyone that wants it by late winter/spring.
Let's say the AZ and J&J vaccines are 75-80% effective rather than 95%. I would think that would still be enough to obtain an EUA. It could still be a very useful tool to end the pandemic. I would rather get a shot that may be somewhat less effective rather than having to wait another few months for the Pfizer and/or Moderna shot. [Reply]
Originally Posted by louie aguiar:
Let's say the AZ and J&J vaccines are 75-80% effective rather than 95%. I would think that would still be enough to obtain an EUA. It could still be a very useful tool to end the pandemic. I would rather get a shot that may be somewhat less effective rather than having to wait another few months for the Pfizer and/or Moderna shot.
The FDA really only requires 50% and would probably approve 30% [Reply]
It's pretty cool to see the vaccine shots actually happening. I have several good friends who are doctors who received the shot in Wichita yesterday. Hope is on the way... [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
So if I'm reading thru all this right, it looks like we really need the JJ vaccine to have great results for us to have enough to vaccinate everyone that wants it by late winter/spring.
What is the constraining factor in manufacturing these? Will there be a common raw ingredient constraint? Or is it simply down to branded manufacturing facilities? I'm worried that there will be the same number of vaccines available no matter how many different varieties there are. [Reply]
Originally Posted by loochy:
What is the constraining factor in manufacturing these? Will there be a common raw ingredient constraint? Or is it simply down to branded manufacturing facilities? I'm worried that there will be the same number of vaccines available no matter how many different varieties there are.
JUST IN: Moderna's Covid-19 vaccine is 94% effective at preventing illness and appears to protect against infection as well, documents released Tuesday morning say. https://t.co/V3VrNN40UW
Originally Posted by louie aguiar:
Let's say the AZ and J&J vaccines are 75-80% effective rather than 95%. I would think that would still be enough to obtain an EUA. It could still be a very useful tool to end the pandemic. I would rather get a shot that may be somewhat less effective rather than having to wait another few months for the Pfizer and/or Moderna shot.
It may just depend on people's work and life situations, but I'd probably prefer to wait a little longer and get the 95% version as long as it's not too long. I have a great shelter-in-place lifestyle. [Reply]