***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 Mecca

https://www.narcity.com/news/us/fl/t...se-2-reopening

Florida sees it's biggest positive single day number throughout this entire thing and hospitalizations rise.

"As you’re testing more, you are going to find more cases, and most of the cases are sub-clinical cases, and we expected that from the beginning,” DeSantis said during Thursday's press conference. “We are doing 30,000 plus tests a day, in terms of results on average."

He would go on to say that the state's rural communities are also seeing large outbreaks.

Officials continue to point to the positivity rate, the percentage of positive tests among the number of people tested, as a sign the state is still trending in the right direction, with the rate currently sitting at 5.3 percent, according to the state's COVID-19 dashboard.

[Spott]

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy

Mask are only encouraged so my family will be there quite a bit. My son is stoked for Kong v Zilla

I’ll go back as soon as they open, although I have no idea what’s out now. I’ve already flown the last 3 weekends on completely full flights, so a half empty movie theatre will be a piece of cake.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by petegz28

My example was a fact. We have a flu vaccine and people still get the flu all the time. Even people who get the flu shot. Go figure.

You're also vaccinating against four different strains of disease with a high degree of antigenic shift. It's a lot different from what we've seen with this virus so far.

[Donger]

Reposting this, since it seems to be pertinent:

[Donger]

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

Reposting this, since it seems to be pertinent:

So THAT'S where I picked up the SARS 2 moniker...

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

You're also vaccinating against four different strains of disease with a high degree of antigenic shift. It's a lot different from what we've seen with this virus so far.

Is it? I thought there were multiple strains of this already? Either way, I hope we get a vaccine. My point is I am not banking on it. When we get it and see it really works then hooray but until then.....

That being said even with a vaccine I don't think Covid is going to go away. It will be around for probably longer than any of us are going to live anyway.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Is it? I thought there were multiple strains of this already? Either way, I hope we get a vaccine. My point is I am not banking on it. When we get it and see it really works then hooray but until then.....

That being said even with a vaccine I don't think Covid is going to go away. It will be around for probably longer than any of us are going to live anyway.

Sure, but don't you think a vaccine would help us get back to "normal" a hell of a lot faster than...nothing? A vaccine doesn't have to be 100% effective for every individual to make a massive difference across the entire population.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Sure, but don't you think a vaccine would help us get back to "normal" a hell of a lot faster than...nothing? A vaccine doesn't have to be 100% effective for every individual to make a massive difference across the entire population.

Possibly. But then so could other effective treatments for that matter.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Is it? I thought there were multiple strains of this already? Either way, I hope we get a vaccine. My point is I am not banking on it. When we get it and see it really works then hooray but until then.....

That being said even with a vaccine I don't think Covid is going to go away. It will be around for probably longer than any of us are going to live anyway.

This is an easy issue become confused about because the language we use to describe it isn't very precise.

There are different strains of SARS-CoV-2, but different strains don't always mean you need different treatments. That depends on the difference from one virus to another. There is evidence that this particular disease does not mutate that much, which means that an effective treatment is likely to confer much broader protection than other viruses. This is also the rationale behind mass vaccination campaigns in general--if everyone is vaccinated for the measles and it can't establish a reservoir it can't mutate; if people don't get vaccinated the disease has an opportunity to mutate, which would then render the vaccine less effective.

In the case of the flu, there are almost 200 different subtypes and 131 types that have been found in people, but what you are commonly vaccinated against are H1N1, H3N2 (both flu A types) and two types of flu B. Within those viruses, there is enough genetic differentiation to make the vaccine a moving target--they try to zero in on the unique characteristics of the viruses of that year. The ability of flu to mutate rapidly is why treatments like amantadine is now functionally worthless (and why Tamiflu soon will be, too).

HIV is even more prone to mutation than the flu, but I don't like the analogy of it being a genius--it mutates so readily because its proofreading enzymes are really inaccurate. Nevertheless, that's why you need combination therapy to keep it in check; as it mutates so rapidly, the odds of resistance become virtually certain if on a single therapy. There are numerous different groups of HIV-1 (M, N, O, P) and within those groups there are subtypes, and within those subtypes there are numerous strains, and those strains can develop resistance to therapies over time, and sometimes clinicians even use that to their advantage. One of the reasons why many people starting out on anti-HIV therapy begin with a regimen with emtricitabine is because the mutation that confers resistance to it (M184, IIRC) actually make the virus less "fit".

What is the point of all this?

Viruses that are more likely to mutate are harder to treat because your initial therapies are less likely to work as the genetic code of the virus changes over time. Given that SARS-CoV-2 has shown little mutation to this point, the odds of a vaccine conferring superior protection in comparison to a flu vaccine are likely if we can find one that stimulates an adequate immune response.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Possibly. But then so could other effective treatments for that matter.

Why do you always have to play some contrarian dumb shit? A vaccine would "possibly" get us back to normal faster? Things won't go back to normal until a vast majority of people aren't scared and a lot of people aren't going to lose their fear just because there are some ways to treat COVID19. A large number of people say they aren't going back to their previous lifestyle until there is a vaccine.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

This is an easy issue become confused about because the language we use to describe it isn't very precise.

There are different strains of SARS-CoV-2, but different strains don't always mean you need different treatments. That depends on the difference from one virus to another. There is evidence that this particular disease does not mutate that much, which means that an effective treatment is likely to confer much broader protection than other viruses. This is also the rationale behind mass vaccination campaigns in general--if everyone is vaccinated for the measles and it can't establish a reservoir it can't mutate; if people don't get vaccinated the disease has an opportunity to mutate, which would then render the vaccine less effective.

In the case of the flu, there are almost 200 different subtypes and 131 types that have been found in people, but what you are commonly vaccinated against are H1N1, H3N2 (both flu A types) and two types of flu B. Within those viruses, there is enough genetic differentiation to make the vaccine a moving target--they try to zero in on the unique characteristics of the viruses of that year. The ability of flu to mutate rapidly is why treatments like amantadine is now functionally worthless (and why Tamiflu soon will be, too).

HIV is even more prone to mutation than the flu, but I don't like the analogy of it being a genius--it mutates so readily because its proofreading enzymes are really inaccurate. Nevertheless, that's why you need combination therapy to keep it in check; as it mutates so rapidly, the odds of resistance become virtually certain if on a single therapy. There are numerous different groups of HIV-1 (M, N, O, P) and within those groups there are subtypes, and within those subtypes there are numerous strains, and those strains can develop resistance to therapies over time, and sometimes clinicians even use that to their advantage. One of the reasons why many people starting out on anti-HIV therapy begin with a regimen with emtricitabine is because the mutation that confers resistance to it (M184, IIRC) actually make the virus less "fit".

What is the point of all this?

Viruses that are more likely to mutate are harder to treat because your initial therapies are less likely to work as the genetic code of the virus changes over time. Given that SARS-CoV-2 has shown little mutation to this point, the odds of a vaccine conferring superior protection in comparison to a flu vaccine are likely if we can find one that stimulates an adequate immune response.

Thanks for the breakdown! Cant wait for Pete to chime in with some response about us not knowing everything about this virus so who knows what it's really like and then claiming something about masks not working.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Why do you always have to play some contrarian dumb shit? A vaccine would "possibly" get us back to normal faster? Things won't go back to normal until a vast majority of people aren't scared and a lot of people aren't going to lose their fear just because there are some ways to treat COVID19. A large number of people say they aren't going back to their previous lifestyle until there is a vaccine.

and just as many would refuse to get the vaccine even if there was one

[Renegade]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Is it? I thought there were multiple strains of this already? Either way, I hope we get a vaccine. My point is I am not banking on it. When we get it and see it really works then hooray but until then.....

That being said even with a vaccine I don't think Covid is going to go away. It will be around for probably longer than any of us are going to live anyway.

Do you have any idea how long Lysol has said on their packaging it kills the Corona virus? How long did it take before we had a cure for Polio? I am sure they were saying the same you are, there will never be a cure.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

and just as many would refuse to get the vaccine even if there was one

Sure, but at least at that point it starts to become one's own choice in the matter. I wear a mask when I'm out these days not because I'm worried for my own safety but because I think it's the best way to keep vulnerable people safe.

If I've been vaccinated and I go to the store and come across an 80-year-old not wearing a mask who hasn't, that's their choice. Right now, someone like that doesn't have much of a choice but to hide or take their chances.