***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.”

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

That's the second time you've mentioned "ghetto." How come?

Lmao, because hospitals are typically at max when located in low social economic area's.

Worse yet, the majority of the time they are full with things that shouldn't require a hospital.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

I can appreciate that perspective. And like I alluded to before, I posted a few of that guy's tweets here because I thought people would be interested and also to hear what other people have to say about it.



I'm not a believer or disbeliever in it at this point. Believe me, when I post something and posters like pete latch onto it while generally smart people like cdcox and hamas are skeptical, it carries weight with me. The opinions of posters who are dumb or are just poop-slingers here I couldn't care less about, but people like those guys who have substantive objections post opinions that I value.



That being said, I have always tried to play within the rules here and also within the boundaries of what people I respect here consider to be acceptable behavior. If it seems this is unwanted or derailing to the thread I don't want to bring that. Everyone knows where to find and follow this person if they are interested in hearing that perspective.

....okay

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

Lmao, because hospitals are typically at max when located in low social economic area's.

Worse yet, the majority of the time they are full with things that shouldn't require a hospital.

Okay.

So, you are saying that 107% capacity is normal for them. Yes?

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

The first article that I clicked on said those hospitals are typically pretty full, so that answered that for me.... but, there are so many other variables as well.



https://abc13.com/houston-icu-capaci...pital/6201846/

...if we say they're usually around 100% anyway, then based on that line they're apparently turning away 20% of non-Covid patients right now. That could mean life or death for the worst cases out there, but of course patients being rerouted isn't terribly uncommon.

I don't know what the average ICU stay is for a Covid patient versus an average ICU patient... I could see ramifications from that if it's significantly longer.... then you're turning away that percentage (and possibly greater percentages in the future) of patients for even longer, which could cause issues at other hospitals that are dealing with the same issues.

I doubt they're generally over capacity, or else that would be their actual capacity? Obviously, I don't know for sure, but I assume they've been asked to expand their number of beds, which also puts strains on supplies and people.

That's just off the top of my head as a non-healthcare person posting on a football message board....

None of that seems hair-on-fire to me, but then again, things have changed drastically in a short period of time (2-4 weeks) in other areas, so I could see why people in general and especially people in the healthcare industry would be concerned..... it doesn't necessarily mean they're fear mongering fear porn hysterical about it, but hospitals in particular have to constantly prepare for worst case scenarios on a patient-by-patient basis, and they're now having to do so on a unit-by-unit/building-by-building/county-by-county basis.

And perhaps thanks to the media and people spending hours upon hours entrenched in their opinion, it gets skewed as WE'RE ALL ****ED!!!.... when those people would just really appreciate it if people wore masks, stayed the hell away from each other at a distance of 6 feet or so, and washed their hands (and of course, there are those who think the world is actually ****ed).

I'm just saying, saying LBJ is at 107% when they probably have a max of 20 ICU beds is just misleading.

Houston as a city has 1,600 ICU beds and over 15,000 LICENSED beds. LBJ makes up 200-ish of those 15,000.

Saying they are 107% of capacity is misleading and bullshit. (Fear Mongering) Especially when you consider the locations of these hospitals and their usual occupancy.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

Okay.

So, you are saying that 107% capacity is normal for them. Yes?

On a bad night probably. considering the amount of beds they have, and where they are located. Yeah I could see it.

Again,

You understanding of Hospitals in Houston is limited. You knowledge of what their usual capacity is limited.

It's best you not comment any further about things you have no 1st hand knowledge of or even a grasp of 2nd hand knowledge. All you are doing is basic fear mongering based on a percentage you, yourself said you dont understand.

So kindly drink a cup of and let it rest.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Donger

Not a big per capita guy, eh?

Don’t hide the raw numbers with percentages. I can do the math.

And we were talking about hospital bed capacity, so you’re moving goalposts. Ignoring that per capita and percent of capacity are apples and androids.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

On a bad night probably. considering the amount of beds they have, and where they are located. Yeah I could see it.

Again,

You understanding of Hospitals in Houston is limited. You knowledge of what their usual capacity is limited.

It's best you not comment any further about things you have no 1st hand knowledge of or even a grasp of 2nd hand knowledge. All you are doing is basic fear mongering based on a percentage you, yourself said you dont understand.

So kindly drink a cup of and let it rest.

Probably? What data do you have to support your presumption?

I understand the percentage just fine, thanks.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

On a bad night probably. considering the amount of beds they have, and where they are located. Yeah I could see it.

Again,

You understanding of Hospitals in Houston is limited. You knowledge of what their usual capacity is limited.

It's best you not comment any further about things you have no 1st hand knowledge of or even a grasp of 2nd hand knowledge. All you are doing is basic fear mongering based on a percentage you, yourself said you dont understand.

So kindly drink a cup of and let it rest.

Busiest Level III trauma center in Texas with 70k+ ER visit annually.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Busiest Level III trauma center in Texas with 70k+ ER visit annually.

10/1 it is because the area it is located in is highly Hispanic and Black. More to do with the Hispanic tho considering the amount of uninsured illegals.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Don’t hide the raw numbers with percentages. I can do the math.

And we were talking about hospital bed capacity, so you’re moving goalposts. Ignoring that per capita and percent of capacity are apples and androids.

I'm not hiding anything. It's just data to me.

And I haven't moved anything. If a hospital ICU is at 107% capacity, that's a problem. If they have 10 ICU beds, and have 11 people who need ICU beds, that's a problem.

You seemed to be saying that in your county of 100,000, having 400 cases is no big deal. Hence, why I said what i did about per capita.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Donger

Probably? What data do you have to support your presumption?

I understand the percentage just fine, thanks.

Here is the floor plan of the LBJ ICU. Lol 107%

https://www.harrishealth.org/locatio...ird-floor.aspx

[tk13]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

Is there any information available at this point about tracing? Where are these people in TX getting it, what is their living situation, are they reliant on public transit, etc

The governor keeps saying it's two things... young people not following the distancing rules, going to bars, etc... and the other is prisons. I don't know if he's actually provided any facts to back that up though, but he's been saying those are the biggest problems.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Here is the floor plan of the LBJ ICU. Lol 107%

https://www.harrishealth.org/locatio...ird-floor.aspx

I'm missing your point.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

I'm missing your point.

Because you are a ****ING moron.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Donger

I'm not hiding anything. It's just data to me.

And I haven't moved anything. If a hospital ICU is at 107% capacity, that's a problem. If they have 10 ICU beds, and have 11 people who need ICU beds, that's a problem.

You seemed to be saying that in your county of 100,000, having 400 cases is no big deal. Hence, why I said what i did about per capita.

Ive openly stated previously that I don’t care about positive tests. At all.