***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.”

[shitgoose]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Yep. There was a woman on CNN last night that owns a salon in Georgia and she said she isn't going to open up and her clients don't want her to. I think you are going to find most businesses will be like that for awhile.

These business will also have to think about all the liability issues with re-opening.

So a salon that reopens could be liable for what exactly? Do gas stations or liquor stores that never closed carry the same liability?

[BigCatDaddy]

Originally Posted by Monticore

Or they could all get jobs tomorrow, and each person had to stab that 1 guy to death before leaving, and are now considered fugitives but now can't work.

Id nominate OaklandHater to be the one stabbed.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by shitgoose

So a salon that reopens could be liable for what exactly?

A stylist that touches a client's hair, neck and face, along with washing said client's hair in a sink shared by dozens of other clients, could be liable if any of those clients contract COVID-19. That puts an enormous amount of pressure, not only on the stylist but on the owner as well, to make certain that all work stations have been sanitized properly, which is nearly impossible to verify.

Plus, there's absolutely no way to cut someone's hair while following strict Social Distancing guidelines, which opens up the stylist and owner to potential lawsuits.

Originally Posted by shitgoose

Do gas stations or liquor stores that never closed carry the same liability?

Most gas stations do not require coming in contact with another human in order to purchase gas. Who the hell is purchasing gas now, anyway?

As for liquor stores, customers have other options in most cities such as deliveries, which minimize contact and if said liqour store doesn't have a barrier between their potential customers, one can easily be installed, limiting contact.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The idea of "opening up" is really a misnomer, anyway.

Children will not return to school until the Fall at the earliest. Disneyland, concert venues and stadiums will not suddenly return to normal or open up because there will be strict Social Distancing orders in place. Restaurants will have maybe half their normal capacity and people that are currently working from home will continue to work from home.

And unfortunately, those people that are on the lower end of the wage scale will be the first to go back to their jobs but they'll be working in high risk conditions, whether they realize it or not.

It's really a sad state of affairs.

Originally Posted by DaFace

My guess is that it'll come down to what people mean by "opening up." If we mean "packed seats 10-12 hours per day," then no, that's not happening. I'd be surprised if stylists and barbers didn't allow a couple of people at a time with enough spacing, though. Hell, throw a chair or two outside (on nice days) and do it that way.

I agree with both of you. It is going to be tough to "open up" back to pre-Covid19 because business owners don't want to get sick or get their employees\clients sick. But low wage earners really won't have a choice because most if not all of them live paycheck to paycheck and that $1200 measly check isn't going to help much.

[O.city]

So what are these business owners supposed to do? File bankruptcy?

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by O.city

So what are these business owners supposed to do? File bankruptcy?

Yup.

[TLO]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree with both of you. It is going to be tough to "open up" back to pre-Covid19 because business owners don't want to get sick or get their employees\clients sick. But low wage earners really won't have a choice because most if not all of them live paycheck to paycheck and that $1200 measly check isn't going to help much.

What about small business owners? They have the choice of opening or losing everything.

[TLO]

People start losing everything they've worked their whole lives building and then the substance abuse, domestic abuse, suicide talk comes in.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by shitgoose

So a salon that reopens could be liable for what exactly? Do gas stations or liquor stores that never closed carry the same liability?

They could be liable if their employees got infected or one of their clients. You already are seeing lawsuits coming out in regards to instances like this.

I saw the other day a nurse's union has sued several hospitals and I know alot more are coming.

There are OSHA regulations you have to follow for infectious diseases like wearing PPE.

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by TLO

People start losing everything they've worked their whole lives building and then the substance abuse, domestic abuse, suicide talk comes in.

So?

[TLO]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

So?

So.... that's bad.

[shitgoose]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

A stylist that touches a client's hair, neck and face, along with washing said client's hair in a sink shared by dozens of other clients, could be liable if any of those clients contract COVID-19. That puts an enormous amount of pressure, not only on the stylist but on the owner as well, to make certain that all work stations have been sanitized properly, which is nearly impossible to verify.

Plus, there's absolutely no way to cut someone's hair while following strict Social Distancing guidelines, which opens up the stylist and owner to potential lawsuits.




Most gas stations do not require coming in contact with another human in order to purchase gas. Who the hell is purchasing gas now, anyway?

As for liquor stores, customers have other options in most cities such as deliveries, which minimize contact and if said liqour store doesn't have a barrier between their potential customers, one can easily be installed, limiting contact.

So in that scenario the Salon or any business could be liable for spreading any infectious disease or would it be limited to Covid-19 only?

If I go to the salon and get a haircut, contract the flu and die because I also have some underlying health condition, my family could sue the Salon?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree with both of you. It is going to be tough to "open up" back to pre-Covid19 because business owners don't want to get sick or get their employees\clients sick. But low wage earners really won't have a choice because most if not all of them live paycheck to paycheck and that $1200 measly check isn't going to help much.

It's really sad that the lowest wage earners are those that are screaming the loudest to "open back up".

Married people earning $100K+ working from the comfort of their homes and single people earning $50k+ from the comfort of their apartments are not clamoring for things to "open back up" (although I know a few parents with younger children that would like to see the schools open but that's a different subject altogether).

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by TLO

So.... that's bad.

Compared to what?

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by O.city

So what are these business owners supposed to do? File bankruptcy?

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Yup.

Originally Posted by TLO

What about small business owners? They have the choice of opening or losing everything.

Exactly the problem. It's real easy for people who aren't in the position to tell someone else how they will run their business. It's true the big chain restaurants will be able to open at something like half capacity and get by. Small businesses on the other hand don't have that luxury.

So as with everything else in life it comes down to the risks you're willing to take. As a business owner are you willing to fully open up as much as you are allowed? As a customer are you willing to go to a place that opened up fully?

Obviously there is no one right answer but there is still a tendency to play down the economic impact this is and is going to continue having.