***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.”

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Pants

No, I'm truly curious about who benefits from these COVID mandates and how. Whether it's mandating masks or closing schools, I want to know.

I can't tell you why other than the circle of Teachers I have talked with both on and off the record have said there is a small group of Teachers that are loud mouths for the union that are driving this. I don't know if it's political or what but those are the facts. I mean we are even providing on-site daycare for the Teacher's kids but yet we can't send our kids to school full time?

A lot has come to light over the last 2 weeks and despite what Donger thinks he knows about Kansas we can clearly see the data doesn't support the fear in anyway. Especially in JoCo. There is a Pediatrician who is a parent of a Blue Valley student that continues to shred the **** out of the numbers the boards and county keep presenting as reason.

Particularly the same thing the Sentinel called out Kansas for over the weekend. I don't think on the surface there is anything wrong with testing less and testing those who lean towards the probable side of the scale.

I do think there is a problem when you do that and then try to portray that as something it isn't.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by stumppy

I notice you didn't answer my question. That's alright, there's no need to point out what most posters in here know about you anyways.

To be known is to be loved, stump...or something like that

[Donger]

It looks like Kansas testing has increased, not decreased.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

It looks like Kansas testing has increased, not decreased.

There was a weird dip in the very beginning of August spiking the percentage.

I'm sure that's the sample people are bringing up.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

There was a weird dip in the very beginning of August spiking the percentage.

I'm sure that's the sample people are bringing up.

It would be nice to see it as a rolling 7 or 14 average.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Pants

There was a weird dip in the very beginning of August spiking the percentage.

I'm sure that's the sample people are bringing up.

KDHE hides low testing rate to push COVID positivity scare

At his press conference yesterday, Norman said Kansas has the 6th-highest COVID positivity rate in the nation, at 10.3%. Norman didn’t cite a source for his claim and KDHE didn’t respond to our questions by press time. Data from Worldometer, however, comes very close; as of August 26, they show Kansas ranked #7, with a 10.2% positivity rate.

But here’s what Dr. Norman conveniently excluded – Kansas has the 2nd-lowest COVID testing rate in the nation, at 135,618 per million, which is 42% below the national average.

Dr. Christine White, a Johnson County pediatrician, recently told the Blue Valley school board that COVID positivity rates are artificially high because “the data is obtained from a skewed sample.” White says the vast majority of people tested in Johnson County already have symptoms or have a known exposure to COVID.

Johnson County’s 14-day moving average positivity rate is 10.6% as of today, and it’s cumulative positivity rate is 7.7%.

Michael Austin, an economist and Director of Entrepreneurial Government for the Sentinel’s parent company, Kansas Policy Institute, says the combination of factors – testing far fewer people than most states and testing a lot of people who already have symptoms – likely results in a strong convenience bias.

“Like a radio host polling his fan mail to see if they like the show, Kansas is placing over-reliance on tests of those with a reasonable suspicion they already have COVID. This statistic under-represents the community at large and should not be the basis of any re-opening policy.”

Dr. Christina Brandmeyer, a Johnson County resident who specializes in pharmacoeconomics, says reliable COVID positivity rates can only come from true random samples of the population, which is not the case in Kansas or Johnson County.

Brandmeyer references a study published on the CDC website. It shows a statewide random sample in Indiana estimates the “prevalence of current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in late April 2020 was 2.79%.” On April 30, the State of Indiana’s official positivity rolling average was 13%…or 4.7 times greater than the statewide random sample found.

“The issue is the delta between what was seen with a randomized sample vs the nonrandomized methodology. Since the nonrandomized is what most states and counties are using, then this shows bias and is not an accurate reflection on the general population.”

Case severity declining, but Norman wants more shutdowns

The Kelly administration focuses on the positivity rate to wag a finger at Kansans, but they make little mention, if any, of the encouraging COVID news. The percentages of cases requiring hospitalization or resulting in deaths have been steadily falling, and the per-capita number of cases and deaths are far below the national average.

Kansas is ranked #43 in deaths per million of population, with 152 compared to the national average of 548, putting Kansas 72% below the national average. The state is 22% below the national average of COVID cases per million of population, with 13,856 compared to 17,793.

Despite this encouraging news, the Kansas City Star reports Norman is pushing the COVID positivity rate and case numbers to justify canceling school sports and extracurricular activities.

“The public health advice I think that I would give is that this would be a ‘gap year’ for doing anything that’s truly optional and stick with the things that are truly essential for schools,” he said. “From a public health perspective, there’s no question we would reduce the risk of disease transmission were we not to have those (sports).”

There are probably tens of thousands of parents, students, and business owners who think this might be the time for Dr. Norman to take a ‘gap year.’

https://sentinelksmo.org/kdhe-hides-...itivity-scare/

[Donger]

Having a relatively low per capita testing rate (compared to other states) artificially inflates positivity percentages how?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

Having a relatively low per capita testing rate (compared to other states) artificially inflates positivity percentages how?

The assumption in this case is that they are only testing people with symptoms. Apparently this is to drive a political agenda.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

Pete's assumption is that they are only testing people with symptoms.

Based on what? I don't doubt that the vast majority of people getting tests are symptomatic.

But, that still doesn't answer my question.

At his press conference yesterday, Norman said Kansas has the 6th-highest COVID positivity rate in the nation, at 10.3%. Norman didn’t cite a source for his claim and KDHE didn’t respond to our questions by press time. Data from Worldometer, however, comes very close; as of August 26, they show Kansas ranked #7, with a 10.2% positivity rate.

But here’s what Dr. Norman conveniently excluded – Kansas has the 2nd-lowest COVID testing rate in the nation, at 135,618 per million, which is 42% below the national average.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Donger

Having a relatively low per capita testing rate (compared to other states) artificially inflates positivity percentages how?

It could be done if you are restricting testing to those much more likely to have a COVID diagnosis anyway.

A crude example: if I wanted to return an astronomically high rate, I could only test recent hospital admissions in respiratory distress. If I wanted to return artificially low rates, I could test groups of people that are working from home, following distancing protocols, and who are not socializing with others.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It could be done if you are restricting testing to those much more likely to have a COVID diagnosis anyway.

A crude example: if I wanted to return an astronomically high rate, I could only test recent hospital admissions in respiratory distress. If I wanted to return artificially low rates, I could test groups of people that are working from home, following distancing protocols, and who are not socializing with others.

Yes, understood. But what does that have to the alleged gotcha regarding Kansas' per capita testing relative to other states? I don't see the relative relevance.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Donger

Yes, understood. But what does that have to the alleged gotcha regarding Kansas' per capita testing relative to other states? I don't see the relative relevance.

Unless they are somehow restricting testing in order to pump up or deflate positivity rates, there is no relevance. But that hasn't stopped people with no medical training and no concept of what they are speaking about from acting as though they are experts on everything from pharmacology to death certificates.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Unless they are somehow restricting testing in order to pump up or deflate positivity rates, there is no relevance. But that hasn't stopped people with no medical training and no concept of what they are speaking about from acting as though they are experts on everything from pharmacology to death certificates.

On the other hand you don't need any special medical training to know how numbers work.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Pants

The assumption in this case is that they are only testing people with symptoms. Apparently this is to drive a political agenda.

Why do you indulge him? He knows perfectly well what the gig is. Anyone who has a basic understanding of math knows how percentages work.

Again, there is nothing wrong with reducing tests and testing only those who "need" to be tested.

But you cannot do that then portray it as if you are doing random tests or make statements like "that means 10% of the people are positive" when in reality the numbers say 10% of the people who showed symptoms, were exposed or otherwise had a particular "need" to be tested were positive.

[petegz28]

Here is what Dr. Areola of Johnson County said about the results of reduced testing that was more skewed towards people who had symptoms or were otherwise exposed...

“Really no matter how you look at the data the numbers are high,” said Dr. Sanmi Areola, Director of the Johnson County Department of Health and Environment. In the last two weeks, more than 11% of COVID-19 tests have come back positive in Johnson County. Dr. Areola says that's a red flag for schools. “If it’s consistent with the rate of infection that we see in the county, 10, 11 %, then you should assume 10 to 11% of people coming in (to schools) are probably infected.”