***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.”

[ChiliConCarnage]

Originally Posted by Nickhead

honest question:

i was of the impression vaccines like flu, small pox, etc. were meant to suppress the virus and therefore pass on so called antibodies (sorry if using wrong term). isn't that what helped tamp down previous virus'?

where as this current covid delta is supposedly making the vaccinated a host and not killing the virus, only making it more transmissible to those around them?

im all for taking a covid vaccine but if what i have read is true, mRNA is not a 'vaccine' by definition?

I mean, yeah, in general the idea is to teach your immune system to fight back. I think we've eliminated very few things, most were just making safer/more liveable. We deal with the flu every year, most of us had variants as a kid which helps

I don't know why mRNA would not be considered a vaccine. I think both the Johnson & Johnson and Astrazeneca vaccines are live virus DNA type vaccines if you'd prefer.

[TLO]

I don't like tweets about 'Bob the antivaxxer' or 'Jane the denialist' who died in pain and in a last gasp, cried about their choices. I find it manipulative and disrespectful and equivalent to antivax propaganda. We should fight vaccine hesitancy with facts and appeal to reason.

— Prof Francois Balloux (@BallouxFrancois) August 7, 2021

[TLO]

Yes, the vaccines ARE effective against the Delta variant. Yes, you will need both doses for maximum protection. Yes, they’re effective against preventing symptomatic infection, severe disease, AND hospitalization. Several studies have proven this now. Stop the misinformation.

— Chise �������� (@sailorrooscout) August 8, 2021

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by SupDock

I’m not sure what you mean.

Both Pfizer and Moderna stated the FDA position in their SEC filings:

"Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects,...

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...a-20200630.htm

[TLO]

Originally Posted by SupDock

I feel like I left the thread for months and nothing changed

Things just recently took a turn in here. The conversation had been much better up until recently.

[BigBeauford]

Originally Posted by TLO

Things just recently took a turn in here. The conversation had been much better up until recently.

I'll admit I am very frustrated at this point and prone to lashing out. I know I am not helping, but damn I can't help replay in my head how this should be done and buried, but a lot of Americans of different stripes aren't doing what it takes.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Both Pfizer and Moderna stated the FDA position in their SEC filings:

"Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects,...

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...a-20200630.htm

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ant...tware-of-life/


Gene therapy product. Not gene therapy. I don’t really like the confusing language of this claim by Moderna.

Gene therapy alters dna in the cell nucleus. The vaccine does not. Gene therapy can create mRNA, but an mRNA vaccine isn’t gene therapy. The product does not even enter the nucleus of the cell.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by SupDock

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ant...tware-of-life/


Gene therapy product. Not gene therapy. I don’t really like the confusing language of this claim by Moderna.

Gene therapy alters dna in the cell nucleus. The vaccine does not. Gene therapy can create mRNA, but an mRNA vaccine isn’t gene therapy. The product does not even enter the nucleus of the cell.

They may well want a different definition but they are required to disclose regulatory issues (FDA) with investors.

More in document:

Regulatory requirements governing gene and cell therapy products have evolved and may continue to change in the future, and the implications for mRNA-based therapies are unknown. For example, the FDA has established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies within CBER to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and convenes the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its review. In the European Union, mRNA has been characterized as a Gene Therapy Medicinal Product. In certain countries, mRNA therapies have not yet been classified or any such classification is not known to us, specifically, in Japan, the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency has not taken a position on the regulatory classification. Notwithstanding the differences between our mRNA investigational medicines and gene therapies, the classification of some of our mRNA investigational medicines as gene therapies in the United States, the European Union, and potentially other countries could adversely impact our ability to develop our investigational medicines, and could negatively impact our platform and our business. For instance, a clinical hold on gene therapy products across the field due to risks associated with altering cell DNA irreversibly may apply to our mRNA investigational medicines irrespective of the mechanistic differences between gene therapies and mRNA.
Adverse events reported with respect to gene therapies or genome editing therapies could adversely impact one or more of our programs. Although our mRNA development candidates and investigational medicines are designed not to make any permanent changes to cell DNA, regulatory agencies or others could believe that adverse effects of gene therapies products caused by introducing new DNA and irreversibly changing the DNA in a cell could also be a risk for our mRNA investigational therapies, and as a result may delay one or more of our trials or impose additional testing for long-term side effects. Any new requirements and guidelines promulgated by regulatory review agencies may have a negative effect on our business by lengthening the regulatory review process

[KCUnited]

Here in Chicago we went from a high average of 30K shots per day in late April to around 4K per day steady in July into August, sitting close to 60% fully vaxxed citywide.

It just seems like its a slow trickle, is what it is type of situation here until something happens to generate more motivation.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

They may well want a different definition but they are required to disclose regulatory issues (FDA) with investors.

More in document:

Regulatory requirements governing gene and cell therapy products have evolved and may continue to change in the future, and the implications for mRNA-based therapies are unknown. For example, the FDA has established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies within CBER to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and convenes the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its review. In the European Union, mRNA has been characterized as a Gene Therapy Medicinal Product. In certain countries, mRNA therapies have not yet been classified or any such classification is not known to us, specifically, in Japan, the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency has not taken a position on the regulatory classification. Notwithstanding the differences between our mRNA investigational medicines and gene therapies, the classification of some of our mRNA investigational medicines as gene therapies in the United States, the European Union, and potentially other countries could adversely impact our ability to develop our investigational medicines, and could negatively impact our platform and our business. For instance, a clinical hold on gene therapy products across the field due to risks associated with altering cell DNA irreversibly may apply to our mRNA investigational medicines irrespective of the mechanistic differences between gene therapies and mRNA.
Adverse events reported with respect to gene therapies or genome editing therapies could adversely impact one or more of our programs. Although our mRNA development candidates and investigational medicines are designed not to make any permanent changes to cell DNA, regulatory agencies or others could believe that adverse effects of gene therapies products caused by introducing new DNA and irreversibly changing the DNA in a cell could also be a risk for our mRNA investigational therapies, and as a result may delay one or more of our trials or impose additional testing for long-term side effects. Any new requirements and guidelines promulgated by regulatory review agencies may have a negative effect on our business by lengthening the regulatory review process

This is all addressed in the link I provided. I’m not engaging in this discussion any more. mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy. There are multiple sources available to you in order to educate yourself.

Heck. Continue reading what you posted

******************

For instance, a clinical hold on gene therapy products across the field due to risks associated with altering cell DNA irreversibly may apply to our mRNA investigational medicines irrespective of the mechanistic differences between gene therapies and mRNA.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by SupDock

This is all addressed in the link I provided. I’m not engaging in this discussion any more. mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy. There are multiple sources available to you in order to educate yourself.

Heck. Continue reading what you posted

For instance, a clinical hold on gene therapy products across the field due to risks associated with altering cell DNA irreversibly may apply to our mRNA investigational medicines irrespective of the mechanistic differences between gene therapies and mRNA.

The regulatory agencies in the US and Europe see it differently than you doc.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

The regulatory agencies in the US and Europe see it differently than you doc.

Once again we’ve reached a point where I no longer understand what you are trying to say.

It is a vaccine. It doesn’t alter your genetics or DNA. Any claim you make that tries to negate these truths is subterfuge.

[Sure-Oz]

I'm not liking more and more news of kids getting really sick now and being hospitalized.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

I'm not liking more and more news of kids getting really sick now and being hospitalized.

Well if more kids are out and about (school starting)
Then more kids will get sick
And more will be hospitalized

Get used to it, because you can't do anything about it other than hide in a hole and not send kids to school

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by SupDock

Once again we’ve reached a point where I no longer understand what you are trying to say.

It is a vaccine. It doesn’t alter your genetics or DNA. Any claim you make that tries to negate these truth is subterfuge.

It doesn't have to alter your DNA to be classified as a "gene therapy product" by the FDA or the European Union.


Truth can be changed with $$$$, see the change in the definition of the scientific term "herd immunity" that took place at the World Health Organization where people who had Covid, recovered, and were now immune are not counted as immune.

Don't worry, if these companies want to get their products labeled a certain way, they will get their way.