***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***

[JakeF]

A couple of reminders...

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.”

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Kidd Lex

I bet most of the posters in this thread who read scientific journals to learn about the novel coronavirus feel the same frustration I do educating the average friend or family member who only reads the headlines. It’s downright irresponsible the shit that gets put out there and is never corrected with the same eye popping headlines. Zero chance Donger has read any of the studies and still throws out the herd immunity comment. For those sailors to have been completely “recovered” at the cellular level and then to “catch” it again goes against everything know to viral science. There’s a mountain of evidence that’s says this novel coronavirus hangs out for weeks and some patients relapse. Also a mountain of evidence the tests provide insufficient accuracy to draw conclusions of reinfection vs relapse. Two week time period in this article is truly laughable. 8 weeks and I’d still guess they were relapsing, or even more likely detecting dead viral rna.

The last I read, there is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by Kidd Lex

I bet most of the posters in this thread who read scientific journals to learn about the novel coronavirus feel the same frustration I do educating the average friend or family member who only reads the headlines. It’s downright irresponsible the shit that gets put out there and is never corrected with the same eye popping headlines. Zero chance Donger has read any of the studies and still throws out the herd immunity comment. For those sailors to have been completely “recovered” at the cellular level and then to “catch” it again goes against everything know to viral science. There’s a mountain of evidence that’s says this novel coronavirus hangs out for weeks and some patients relapse. Also a mountain of evidence the tests provide insufficient accuracy to draw conclusions of reinfection vs relapse. Two week time period in this article is truly laughable. 8 weeks and I’d still guess they were relapsing, or even more likely detecting dead viral rna.

The conversations I have in here is pretty much what my daily life is like because I work at the hospital my friends , family , patients fellow staff ask me the same Stuff over and over .

Two week timeline is pretty short to assume reinfection unless they had 10negative tests And even then I would question the test first.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by Donger

The last I read, there is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Not sure they have proof , in theory they believe but they are unsure for how long and how much antibodies are needed to be .

That was last I read things may have changed

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by Donger

The last I read, there is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Quite a bit of good data is emerging, but it’s not fear porn so it doesn’t get the clicks and therefore the headlines.

Here’s one from this week, of course nothing definitive, but it’s looking positive, pun not intended.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...-term-immunity

https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/0...us-antibodies/

Again my point is not to take a shot at you, it’s the fact that the headlines stuff fear down our throats, but don’t highlight studies like the one above to update the fear inducing headlines. How many people still think Richard Jewel was the Olympic bomber? How many can name the actual bomber?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Donger

The last I read, there is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

Well, it was always unlikely because it would go against every other virus we've ever come in contact with.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....30.20085613v1

This shows that the vast majority seroconvert. If thats the case, they'll have immunity. We're now finding high levels of T cells as well in more recent studies, which woudl imply long term immunity.

Also good for vaccine development.

[Donger]

Thanks guys.

[O.city]

Its pretty much impossible to confirm long term immunity at this point though, we haven't had "long term" time to study it.

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by O.city

Its pretty much impossible to confirm long term immunity at this point though, we haven't had "long term" time to study it.

Yep, although SARS is a very similar virus and has proven to give 5+ years and likely more. Human body is amazing

['Hamas' Jenkins]

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1998

Guidelines from the American College of Physicians

Should Clinicians Use Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine Alone or in Combination With Azithromycin for the Prophylaxis or Treatment of COVID-19?

The efficacy of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin to prevent COVID-19 after infection with SARS-CoV-2 or to treat patients with COVID-19 is not established and future clinical trials are needed to answer these questions. There are known harms of these medications when used to treat other diseases (5, 6). Current evidence about efficacy and harms for use in the context of COVID-19 is sparse, conflicting, and from low quality studies, increasing the uncertainty and lowering our confidence in the conclusions of these studies when assessing the benefits or understanding the balance when compared with harms. These interim practice points are based on best available evidence. We will maintain these practice points as a living guidance document, updated as new evidence becomes available.

Do not use chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin as prophylaxis against COVID-19 due to known harms and no available evidence of benefits in the general population.

Do not use chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin as a treatment of patients with COVID-19 due to known harms and no available evidence of benefits in patients with COVID-19.

In light of known harms and very uncertain evidence of benefit in patients with COVID-19, using shared and informed decision making with patients (and their families), clinicians may treat hospitalized COVID-19–positive patients with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin in the context of a clinical trial.

Should chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin be used for treatment of patients with COVID-19?

Interventions Use? Rationale
Chloroquine NO* No available evidence in COVID-19–positive patients
Chloroquine + Azithr NO* No available evidence in COVID-19–positive patients
Hydroxychloroquine NO* Insufficient evidence about benefits and harms
Hydroxychloroquine + NO* Insufficient evidence about benefits and harms
Azithromycin

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Donger

So what's the estimated CFR?

Antibody tests in France put the IFR at 0.7% with a 95% range of 0.5%-0.9%

[Donger]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Antibody tests in France put the IFR at 0.7% with a 95% range of 0.5%-0.9%

Thanks.

[Donger]

Question: don't most of us have antibodies for seasonal flu?

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by Donger

Question: don't most of us have antibodies for seasonal flu?

The flu shot protects you for about 6 months depending on the person

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Monticore

The flu shot protects you for about 6 months depending on the person

What about people who don't get flu shots? Haven't most of them been exposed to seasonal influenza, and shouldn't they therefore have antibodies?

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by Donger

What about people who don't get flu shots? Haven't most of them been exposed to seasonal influenza, and shouldn't they therefore have antibodies?

Flu viruses continually change over time. This constant changing enables the virus to evade the immune system, so that people are susceptible to the flu throughout life. This process works as follows: a person infected with a flu virus develops antibodies against that virus; as the virus changes, the "older" antibodies no longer recognizes the "newer" virus, and the person gets sick. The older antibodies can, however, provide partial protection against newer viruses.

Copied it, explains it bettering than I could.plus I lam lazy