***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.”

[loochy]

Originally Posted by stumppy

IMHO that's exactly what we should have done.

I don't think the public would have taken it though. The people that are protesting now would have absolutely flipped if there was a real lockdown.


There wouldn't be enough national guardsmen to contain it.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by O.city

Yes

Which we’ve seemingly squashed so it would be smart imo to start slowly opening back up and Monitoring what works

Aboslutely. I'm not advocating to turn it all back on full scale everywhere now.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by O.city

Isn’t the worry that if you open areas that aren’t bad they will become bad?

Then we should never open. I mean seriously, I am not trying to be snarky but we cannot just wait for the "perfect scenario" to open because it does not exist.

Should we stay locked down for the next year because we are afraid of a 2nd wave this fall?

This virus isn't going to just die.

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by loochy

I don't think the public would have taken it though. The people that are protesting now would have absolutely flipped if there was a real lockdown.


There wouldn't be enough national guardsmen to contain it.

There could have been targeted shut downs and testing could have been made a priority.
I'll just leave it at that. Wrong forum.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by loochy

Isn't the whole point to "flatten the curve" and not overwhelm hospitals, not prevent everything everywhere?

The former was absolutely the initial rationale, and the latter is starting to percolate.

People are playing with fire, the last thing you want when managing something like this, is people getting the sense they're being asked to 'look at the flowers'

[wazu]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's not meaningless because you are presenting a false dichotomy. There also exists a possibility wherein you can reduce the spread of the virus through mitigation methods to a point where herd immunity is not needed, and there are more examples of that method that we've seen to this point (Asian countries) than the Sweden model.

Sweden will be proven wrong if they have excess cases and deaths that could have been prevented through better testing and contact tracing, which is what Norway was out in front of, perhaps better than any other country in Europe.

I'm coming around to this way of thinking. My feeling is we have to open things up and really, really soon in order to preserve our way of life and not lose everything. If we can do this safely through testing/contact tracing etc then that sounds like the best possible path.

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Then we should never open. I mean seriously, I am not trying to be snarky but we cannot just wait for the "perfect scenario" to open because it does not exist.

Should we stay locked down for the next year because we are afraid of a 2nd wave this fall?

This virus isn't going to just die.

Yeah, on that note if you want have a good day don’t research coronavirus and mutations. Prospects for a conventional vaccine look bleak. IMO going to require effective viral therapeutics, an all encompassing vaccine, or a **** it all let’s see what happens attitude to reopen 100%. Hope what I’m reading and or my understanding are flawed.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's not meaningless because you are presenting a false dichotomy. There also exists a possibility wherein you can reduce the spread of the virus through mitigation methods to a point where herd immunity is not needed, and there are more examples of that method that we've seen to this point (Asian countries) than the Sweden model.

Sweden will be proven wrong if they have excess cases and deaths that could have been prevented through better testing and contact tracing, which is what Norway was out in front of, perhaps better than any other country in Europe.

Serious question, who or what defines excess? I mean what's the measure of excess death vs excess financial destruction and mental strain on a society?

Its a tough question and a harder answer.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Serious question, who or what defines excess? I mean what's the measure of excess death vs excess financial destruction and mental strain on a society?

Its a tough question and a harder answer.

I agree. Who defines excess and how is excess measured? Using hindsight based on an assumption is the only way in this case.

If our models have shown us anything it's that it's impossible to predict any of this shit without changing your prediction every 48 hours.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by tk13

It seems forever ago, but it was exactly one month ago today we had 300 deaths.

That's 45,000 people dead in one month. While basically the entire country was shut down.

So just like the flu.

Said no one ever.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by tk13

It seems forever ago, but it was exactly one month ago today we had 300 deaths.

That's 45,000 people dead in one month. While basically the entire country was shut down.

That's a touch misleading. As we are finding people going back to Feb if not sooner who had it you are assuming no one before March died from it. Most likely you had people dying from this but we weren't looking for it so......one month ago today is a bit arbitrary.

[petegz28]

On the other hand today we are stating someone died from it even though they have not been tested for it.

The reality is we most likely had people who had this and died from it months before we started looking for it and we are most likely inflating the numbers a bit by assuming people have died from it without knowing for sure.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by petegz28

On the other hand today we are stating someone died from it even though they have not been tested for it.

The reality is we most likely had people who had this and died from it months before we started looking for it and we are most likely inflating the numbers a bit by assuming people have died from it without knowing for sure.

We most likely missed some as well with this theory.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by petegz28

That's a touch misleading. As we are finding people going back to Feb if not sooner who had it you are assuming no one before March died from it. Most likely you had people dying from this but we weren't looking for it so......one month ago today is a bit arbitrary.

It's not arbitrary at all.

March 21 = 374 deaths
April 21 = 45,318 deaths

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Donger

It's not arbitrary at all.

March 21 = 374 deaths
April 21 = 45,318 deaths

Yes it is. How do you know we didn't have anyone die from this before we started keeping count?