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 lawrenceRaider:
Most, if not all, the immunity studies I've seen on people who recovered from COVID show they likely have long term, if not lifetime, immunity. At least one did bone marrow samples to check for immunity cells there and found them.
Even people who only had mild cases. Asymptomatic cases are still under study last I looked, though I saw at least one that was pointing to them also having at least some natural immunity.
Not a case for skipping the shot. Studies have also shown that getting the shot after recovering from COVID provides better protection than just having had the vaccination alone or natural immunity alone.
New studies are showing that people with prior covid infection are actually more protected from Delta than the vaccinated.
Why would someone need to take a shot with no long term studies and risk adverse reaction when they are already better protected than the vaccinated? Unless they are in high risk category it makes no sense.
For that reason alone it makes these mandates ridiculous. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Nirvana58:
New studies are showing that people with prior covid infection are actually more protected from Delta than the vaccinated.
Why would someone need to take a shot with no long term studies and risk adverse reaction when they are already better protected than the vaccinated? Unless they are in high risk category it makes no sense.
For that reason alone it makes these mandates ridiculous.
I'm not completely opposed to an antibody test being allowed in lieu of a vaccine. The issue I have with it is that there are tons of people claim they had COVID because they had the sniffles a year ago, and that's not anywhere near enough confirmation for me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Natural immunity is going to wane as well. Just depends on the antigenic drift of the pathogen
Sure, but so is vaccine immunity. If my J&J vaccine at 70% (or whatever) effectiveness is good enough, I'm generally comfortable with antibody-proven natural immunity being allowed as well for now at least. If we get better data about waning immunity, that opinion would change. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Natural immunity is going to wane as well. Just depends on the antigenic drift of the pathogen
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Sure, but so is vaccine immunity. If my J&J vaccine at 70% (or whatever) effectiveness is good enough, I'm generally comfortable with antibody-proven natural immunity being allowed as well for now at least. If we get better data about waning immunity, that opinion would change.
Yeah we have had in this very thread multiple people state they got covid twice and I think all them had a PCR test done both times.
Talking to my uncle yesterday that lives in Vegas and is 83, he got his 2nd shot Moderna back in February and ended up in the hospital a couple of weeks ago with Covid. He said he wasn't to bad off but he was there for a few days. For people his age they are going to need a booster for sure. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I'm not completely opposed to an antibody test being allowed in lieu of a vaccine. The issue I have with it is that there are tons of people claim they had COVID because they had the sniffles a year ago, and that's not anywhere near enough confirmation for me.
Antibody test should be the standard. Via prior infection or vaccination. [Reply]
I was inoculated, had serious side effects and still caught covid. 24 hours after the jab I was at a restaurant and saw the room spinning at high speed and my heartbeat became irregular. Held on to the table to prevent falling off the chair until my wife grabbed me and led me to a couch. After 30 minutes she helped me to the car and she dove us home. Here is my overriding concern. There is no way to discern which conflicting covid information is reliable and which is agenda driven. Should you believe politicians, bureaucrats, doctors, hospitals, media, drug companies and others who may have and ax to grind which overrides concerns about our health? We all should be prudently skeptical. My college aged son asked me last night if he should be vaccinated. I told him it was his call and discussed my experience, thoughts and that I would not recommend it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 64 Chief:
I was inoculated, had serious side effects and still caught covid. 24 hours after the jab I was at a restaurant and saw the room spinning at high speed and my heartbeat became irregular. Held on to the table to prevent falling off the chair until my wife grabbed me and led me to a couch. After 30 minutes she helped me to the car and she dove us home. Here is my overriding concern. There is no way to discern which conflicting covid information is reliable and which is agenda driven. Should you believe politicians, bureaucrats, doctors, hospitals, media, drug companies and others who may have and ax to grind which overrides concerns about our health? We all should be prudently skeptical. My college aged son asked me last night if he should be vaccinated. I told him it was his call and discussed my experience, thoughts and that I would not recommend it.
From the beginning, my biggest source of confusion about all of this is that people don't seem to think that the CDC is a reliable source. I don't really know what they've done that makes people skeptical.
Media? Politicians? Sure. I get the skepticism. But we have an agency whose entire mission is to synthesize research and coordinate responses to diseases. If you are confused about what's real and what isn't, they have tons of information to help walk you through it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I'm not completely opposed to an antibody test being allowed in lieu of a vaccine. The issue I have with it is that there are tons of people claim they had COVID because they had the sniffles a year ago, and that's not anywhere near enough confirmation for me.
Antibodies wane pretty quickly. But memory cells remember how to crank them out again when needed. There's no good test for memory cells afaik.
Which is why it's very hard to make policy based on whether or not someone was sick with covid. It works on a personal level - if you know you had it and know your were sick. But it falls down hard on a policy level - since so many people will think they had it but didn't, and how do you define "sick"? [Reply]
Originally Posted by 64 Chief:
I was inoculated, had serious side effects and still caught covid. 24 hours after the jab I was at a restaurant and saw the room spinning at high speed and my heartbeat became irregular. Held on to the table to prevent falling off the chair until my wife grabbed me and led me to a couch. After 30 minutes she helped me to the car and she dove us home. Here is my overriding concern. There is no way to discern which conflicting covid information is reliable and which is agenda driven. Should you believe politicians, bureaucrats, doctors, hospitals, media, drug companies and others who may have and ax to grind which overrides concerns about our health? We all should be prudently skeptical. My college aged son asked me last night if he should be vaccinated. I told him it was his call and discussed my experience, thoughts and that I would not recommend it.
Stick with information from the experts who've dedicated decades of their lives to studying these types of things. Politicians, bureaucrats, media, etc have no experience in this area and are well known for struggles with truth. Don't fall down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
Antibodies wane pretty quickly. But memory cells remember how to crank them out again when needed. There's no good test for memory cells afaik.
Which is why it's very hard to make policy based on whether or not someone was sick with covid. It works on a personal level - if you know you had it and know your were sick. But it falls down hard on a policy level - since so many people will think they had it but didn't, and how do you define "sick"?
No easy tests for the memory cells as I think they are in the bone marrow.
However, making it standard that anyone who has been vaccinated or recovered from COVID gets an antibody test X number of days after test/vaccine would take care of that. [Reply]
I feel like the world is a lot like the Internet these days, where people pick an opinion and then defend it to the death (literally in this case), regardless of whether they learn more that would change their conclusions. I retain a hope that if people keep seeing facts, then they can keep weighing the data, and at some point they can be rational and change their minds without believing that it's a loss of pride to do so. I think it's a great sign of intelligence to do that. [Reply]