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.”
So it looks as though Omicron will almost certainly overtake Delta based upon what I've read this morning.
This could be bad.
This could be good.
I stopped watching case numbers months ago, but I have a feeling they are going to absolutely skyrocket. How those cases translate to hospitalizations and deaths remain to be seen. [Reply]
2 doses of Pfizer gives you very little protection against symptomatic infection vs Omicron. No data on J&J or Moderna, but you have to assume they'll follow the same pattern.
Previous infection alone gives you very little protection.
Best protection you can get against SYMPTOMATIC illness is a booster. If you've been infected before, get a shot of moderna or pfizer.
Really hoping the data will show the 2 dose or previous infection will hold up against severe disease and death. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
On the topic of boosters.
2 doses of Pfizer gives you very little protection against symptomatic infection vs Omicron. No data on J&J or Moderna, but you have to assume they'll follow the same pattern.
Previous infection alone gives you very little protection.
Best protection you can get against SYMPTOMATIC illness is a booster. If you've been infected before, get a shot of moderna or pfizer.
Really hoping the data will show the 2 dose or previous infection will hold up against severe disease and death.
Same. I'm hoping 2 dose is still protected well [Reply]
Researchers used blood samples collected from Com-COV2 study participants who had received two doses of standard COVID-19 vaccination schedules to perform neutralisation assays using Omicron virus isolate
Substantial fall in neutralising titres suggest that while there is no evidence of increased potential to cause severe disease, or death, increased infections in previously infected, or vaccinated individuals may be likely
Increasing vaccine uptake among unvaccinated, and encouraging third doses, remain priority to reduce transmission levels and potential for severe disease
Researchers from the University of Oxford have analysed the impact of the Omicron COVID-19 variant of concern on one of the immune responses generated by vaccination.
Using blood samples from individuals who had previously received two doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines as part of the Com-COV study, and a live virus isolate, they demonstrate substantial decrease in neutralising titres – a measure of the level of neutralising antibodies generated in responses to vaccination against, or infection from, COVID-19.
The results, published on the pre-print server MedRxiv, indicate that the Omicron variant has the potential to drive a further wave of infections, including among those already vaccinated, although the researchers highlight that there is currently no evidence of increased potential to cause severe disease, hospitalisations or deaths in vaccinated populations.
These results align with recently published data from UK Health Security Agency, showing reduced effectiveness of two doses of these vaccines against symptomatic disease due to the Omicron variant compared to Delta. Importantly, this effectiveness was improved by a third dose of vaccine.
Professor Gavin Screaton, Head of the University’s Medical Sciences Division, and lead author of the paper, said:
‘These data will help those developing vaccines, and vaccination strategies, to determine the routes to best protect their populations, and press home the message that those who are offered booster vaccination should take it.
‘Whilst there is no evidence for increased risk of severe disease, or death, from the virus amongst vaccinated populations, we must remain cautious, as greater case numbers will still place a considerable burden on healthcare systems.’
Professor Matthew Snape, Professor in Paediatrics and Vaccinology at the University of Oxford and co-author, said:
‘It was always a goal of the Com-COV studies to be able to have samples ready, if needed, to test various vaccination schedules against new variants of the coronavirus as they emerged, and we were delighted to assist our colleagues with this important study to enhance our knowledge of how the virus is changing.
‘These data are important but are only one part of the picture. They only look at neutralising antibodies after the second dose, but do not tell us about cellular immunity, and this will also be tested using stored samples once the assays are available.
‘Importantly, we have not yet assessed the impact of a “third dose” booster, which we know significantly increases antibody concentrations, and it is likely that this will lead to improved potency against the Omicron variant.’
Professor Teresa Lambe, Professor in Vaccinology at the University of Oxford, and an author on the paper, said:
‘Vaccination induces many arms of our immune system, including neutralising antibodies and T-cells. Real-world effectiveness data has shown us that vaccines continue to protect against severe disease with previous variants of concern. The best way to protect us going forward in this pandemic is by getting vaccines in arms.’ [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sure-Oz:
Jackson County voted against the mask mandate today 5-4. Not a fan of that with cases going up.
My issue with mask mandates at this point is that they have so many nonsensical parts to them. In situations where people are enclosed spaces for a long period of time together, sure, makes sense. So I'm on board for public transit, airplanes, concerts, indoor sporting events, schools, and workplaces.
But let's stop pretending like wearing a mask from the door of a restaurant to your seat makes any sense at all. Similarly, you're not likely going to catch it from walking past someone in a grocery store or retail store, and they're all but meaningless outside in any situation. Requiring them in those places just makes people roll their eyes and push back on the situations where they're warranted.
(But more broadly, I'm generally fine with the "vaccines, not masks" approach at this point. People have had their chance.) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sure-Oz:
Jackson County voted against the mask mandate today 5-4. Not a fan of that with cases going up.
Maybe my thinking is wrong here but I feel like at this point, people who have been following the mandate will likely keep wearing masks, and those who weren't still won't. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath15:
Maybe my thinking is wrong here but I feel like at this point, people who have been following the mandate will likely keep wearing masks, and those who weren't still won't.
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My issue with mask mandates at this point is that they have so many nonsensical parts to them. In situations where people are enclosed spaces for a long period of time together, sure, makes sense. So I'm on board for public transit, airplanes, concerts, indoor sporting events, schools, and workplaces.
But let's stop pretending like wearing a mask from the door of a restaurant to your seat makes any sense at all. Similarly, you're not likely going to catch it from walking past someone in a grocery store or retail store, and they're all but meaningless outside in any situation. Requiring them in those places just makes people roll their eyes and push back on the situations where they're warranted.
(But more broadly, I'm generally fine with the "vaccines, not masks" approach at this point. People have had their chance.)
Yeah I'm fine with vaccines. Yeah the restaurant I can completely agree with.. the situations you mentioned more so at this point. I'm definitely wanting it in schools as cases are rising and I'm getting way more "your child may have been exposed' emails lately than when they had masking. Definitely would like to push more vaccines then anything. Hopefully we get decent news on omicran re:2 shot. I know a few people that don't want to get a booster cause they did their 2 shot. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
My issue with mask mandates at this point is that they have so many nonsensical parts to them. In situations where people are enclosed spaces for a long period of time together, sure, makes sense. So I'm on board for public transit, airplanes, concerts, indoor sporting events, schools, and workplaces.
But let's stop pretending like wearing a mask from the door of a restaurant to your seat makes any sense at all. Similarly, you're not likely going to catch it from walking past someone in a grocery store or retail store, and they're all but meaningless outside in any situation. Requiring them in those places just makes people roll their eyes and push back on the situations where they're warranted.
(But more broadly, I'm generally fine with the "vaccines, not masks" approach at this point. People have had their chance.)
I was doing some Christmas shopping yesterday and noticed one of KC's event venues has a chart for whether a certain event requires a vaccine, a 72-hour negative test, and masks.... and many weren't accepting the negative test, but some were, and some didn't list the mask thing.
So, you have to not only research the city/state, and not only the venue, but the specific event on any given night. :-)
I'm guessing the rationale for restaurants is there's a chance of many people huddling around the front if there's a wait, so then it becomes more about a lack of social distancing in that situation, and possibly being crammed in a small space.... but yeah, most of the time it's pretty pointless.
Arizona hasn't had a mask mandate in so long, I think the only time I've worn one is at the doctor's office (not for Covid :-) ).... but, I work from home full time and don't ever go anywhere, anyway, heh. [Reply]
Originally Posted by penguinz:
At this point cases don't matter as much assuming all the data on the new Omnicron is accurate showing that it is a weaker strain.
As long as hospitalizations stay low enough for hospitals to not struggle is all that is important.
We have to get back to a real normal. Not this stupid post-covid normal.
Yeah, it'll be one of those things for a while where if you don't act fast enough and it becomes a problem, you've just screwed your healthcare workers once again, but also shouldn't overreact, especially as you're most likely impacting a lot of vaccinated people who most likely wouldn't wind up in the hospital anyway.
I haven't looked lately though to see if/which areas are struggling... seems like there's a cautious optimism here. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
I was doing some Christmas shopping yesterday and noticed one of KC's event venues has a chart for whether a certain event requires a vaccine, a 72-hour negative test, and masks.... and many weren't accepting the negative test, but some were, and some didn't list the mask thing.
So, you have to not only research the city/state, and not only the venue, but the specific event on any given night. :-)
I'm guessing the rationale for restaurants is there's a chance of many people huddling around the front if there's a wait, so then it becomes more about a lack of social distancing in that situation, and possibly being crammed in a small space.... but yeah, most of the time it's pretty pointless.
Arizona hasn't had a mask mandate in so long, I think the only time I've worn one is at the doctor's office (not for Covid :-) ).... but, I work from home full time and don't ever go anywhere, anyway, heh.
We went back to an indoor mask mandate, so I'll do it. But my general rule before that is that I try to avoid spending more than 10 minutes indoors with a crowd of people. I'm not worried about being outside, and I'm not worried about dashing into a restaurant to pick something up. I'll eat in a non-crowded restaurant or go to a mall where people are milling about. I'm just not doing big crowd activities where I'm next to the same people for long periods of time. [Reply]
