***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.”

[O.city]

You can’t just start dosing people with that yet. You’ve gotta let the clinical studies work it out.

Well know soon enough on those

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Everyone keeps talking about hospitals being overrun. That is not a foregone conclusion, especially now that we likely have an effective treatment.

OK, enough bitching about the hyper emotional decision making up to this point... let's talk about the future.

What if the following scenario played out...

On Monday doctors nationwide start prescribing HCQ+azithromycin to patients testing positive for Covid-19. (I am not saying all doctors are mandated to do so but a significant number begin to adopt this treatment plan)

Our supplies of both hold up (this is actually likely given how readily available both are) The US also ramps up production ( and taps into strategic stockpile and military supplies) to meet any upcoming need.

After 6 days, 80%+ of all treated people are virus free.

At what point would you support lifting all the mandated restrictions and just issuing advisories and continuing Federal support for testing and recovery (both economic and medical)?

If this plays out, I can not see ANY excuse for not lifting restrictions by April 1.

This will not happen for several reasons

1. We aren't sure it works
2. We don't have enough of the meds. If it does work, we need it for hospitalized patients.
3. In general, very few patients are being tested at this point due to shortages.
4. These medications have risks

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

How so? Most of what is posted is completely plausible. Please give me specifics you take issue with.

The drug cocktail has not been proven effective.

And just because something is plausible does not mean it's probable. Your scenario is over three standard deviations from the likely outcome.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by SupDock

This will not happen for several reasons

1. We aren't sure it works
2. We don't have enough of the meds. If it does work, we need it for hospitalized patients.
3. In general, very few patients are being tested at this point due to shortages.

They have already ramped up production of those meds along with others

[TLO]

Originally Posted by arrowheadnation

Like every other plague or outbreak in history, infections and death will not keep growing exponentially. It's impossible. Both will inevitably reach a point where they start to trend down and things return to normal. It is the measures we take to speed up that downturn that will tell how quickly normal returns. It's all explained much more eloquently in the linked article below. This is a good read. No need to read it all. There is a lot you already know, but definitely worth your time...and who doesn't have time to kill right now.

https://medium.com/six-four-six-nine...9-1b767def5894

ERROR
410
This post is under investigation or was found in violation of the Medium Rules.
There are thousands of stories to read on Medium. Visit our homepage
to find one that’s right for you.
Take me to Medium

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by O.city

You can’t just start dosing people with that yet. You’ve gotta let the clinical studies work it out.

Well know soon enough on those

ah... and why exactly not? The one (ridiculously small) study we have showed it to be 100% effective. And what is the HARM in prescribing it? These are two drugs that are REGULARLY prescribed together in anyone who has RA and a bacterial infection. It may not prove to be effective (I'm willing to bet it is), but please tell me the EXACT harm in trying it?

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by O.city

They have already ramped up production of those meds along with others

Having enough for all positive patients vs critically ill ones is a big difference.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

ah... and why exactly not? The one (ridiculously small) study we have showed it to be 100% effective. And what is the HARM in prescribing it? These are two drugs that are REGULARLY prescribed together in anyone who has RA and a bacterial infection. It may not prove to be effective (I'm willing to bet it is), but please tell me the EXACT harm in trying it?

Cardiac arrhythmia

These drugs are not "regularly " prescribed together.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Everyone keeps talking about hospitals being overrun. That is not a foregone conclusion, especially now that we likely have an effective treatment.

OK, enough bitching about the hyper emotional decision making up to this point... let's talk about the future.

What if the following scenario played out...

On Monday doctors nationwide start prescribing HCQ+azithromycin to patients testing positive for Covid-19. (I am not saying all doctors are mandated to do so but a significant number begin to adopt this treatment plan)

Our supplies of both hold up (this is actually likely given how readily available both are) The US also ramps up production ( and taps into strategic stockpile and military supplies) to meet any upcoming need.

After 6 days, 80%+ of all treated people are virus free.

At what point would you support lifting all the mandated restrictions and just issuing advisories and continuing Federal support for testing and recovery (both economic and medical)?

If this plays out, I can not see ANY excuse for not lifting restrictions by April 1.

80% of cases now are mild. It is the 20% who do not have mild symptoms that is driving this crisis. The virus is highly transmissible and even 20% serious cases represents millions of patients with the likelihood of our health care system being over run. Why do you think going from 20% problematic cases to 20% represents a game changer?

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by SupDock

This will not happen for several reasons

1. We aren't sure it works
2. We don't have enough of the meds. If it does work, we need it for hospitalized patients.
3. In general, very few patients are being tested at this point due to shortages.
4. These medications have risks

1. What harm is there in trying.
2. I am actually expecting doctors to prescribe it for patients with more severe symptoms not just anyone who tests positive. (I should have clarified that)
3. See 2, this would be for those with more severe symptoms who have been tested.
4. The risks are beyond ****ing minimal. That is a complete bullshit excuse, ask any competent pharmacist about the risks.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

1. What harm is there in trying.
2. I am actually expecting doctors to prescribe it for patients with more severe symptoms not just anyone who tests positive. (I should have clarified that)
3. See 2, this would be for those with more severe symptoms who have been tested.
4. The risks are beyond ****ing minimal. That is a complete bullshit excuse, ask any competent pharmacist about the risks.

I don't need to ask one. What qualifies you to make this statement?

[007]

So how do you all feel about KC going shelter in place on Tuesday. I'm shocked that they are going to enforce it as a misdemeanor, fine, and jail time.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Everyone keeps talking about hospitals being overrun. That is not a foregone conclusion, especially now that we likely have an effective treatment.

OK, enough bitching about the hyper emotional decision making up to this point... let's talk about the future.

What if the following scenario played out...

On Monday doctors nationwide start prescribing HCQ+azithromycin to patients testing positive for Covid-19. (I am not saying all doctors are mandated to do so but a significant number begin to adopt this treatment plan)

Our supplies of both hold up (this is actually likely given how readily available both are) The US also ramps up production ( and taps into strategic stockpile and military supplies) to meet any upcoming need.

After 6 days, 80%+ of all treated people are virus free.

At what point would you support lifting all the mandated restrictions and just issuing advisories and continuing Federal support for testing and recovery (both economic and medical)?

If this plays out, I can not see ANY excuse for not lifting restrictions by April 1.

A New York surgeon has already said that hospitals will be overwhelmed soon and that healthcare workers are at serious risk. Could you imagine what it would be like if everyone was out there working and partying right now?

I think your notion that it is not a foregone conclusion that hospitals wouldnt be overrun if the at risk were self quarantined and everyone went about their business like this virus isnt extremely contagious is a little too optimistic for my taste.

Here's a link to the article with the surgeon warning about the risks of hospital problems.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...ys/ar-BB11wbhk

[Fish]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

1. What harm is there in trying.
2. I am actually expecting doctors to prescribe it for patients with more severe symptoms not just anyone who tests positive. (I should have clarified that)
3. See 2, this would be for those with more severe symptoms who have been tested.
4. The risks are beyond ****ing minimal. That is a complete bullshit excuse, ask any competent pharmacist about the risks.

Pretty sure you just did though.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by Fish

Pretty sure you just did though.

My guess is, if you disagree you are "incompetent"