***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.”

[suzzer99]

[TLO]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

I think about this when I've heard of people going to farm stores to buy ivermictin.

Vaccine - Scary!!!
Farm store ivermictin designed for horses - this seems fine.

[Lzen]

Came across this the other day. Just wondering what are your opinions on this? Can you prove/disprove anything that is said here?
I am truly curious. Not trying to push any agenda.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CSgC0SdjRKK/

[TLO]

Originally Posted by Lzen

Came across this the other day. Just wondering what are your opinions on this? Can you prove/disprove anything that is said here?
I am truly curious. Not trying to push any agenda.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CSgC0SdjRKK/

Nvm. Got it to open. I stopped listening at Joe Rogan and ivermictin.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

Wow. And you try to put off like you're the smart one in the room? It doesn't matter which months you look at? Really? So if you include the data from when the vaccine wasn't readily available and most people weren't vaccinated you don't think it skews the numbers? Have you looked at deaths of vaccinated vs unvaccinated for recent months? Of course you haven't because you wouldn't be saying that if you did.

I shared this in the other post. I'll share it again here.


When you look at just one of the charts in the picture above, I understand why you would think most deaths are in the unvaccinated. Clearly there are more vaccinated deaths according to just one of those charts by itself. Now look at the dates. They are measuring back to December when most weren't vaccinated. However, if you compare the charts from one week to the next you can see what the newest data is. You'll see that CURRENTLY just as many vaccinated are dying as non-vaccinated. The numbers don't lie. Just the people that report them. The graphic like the one I originally commented on bothers me because vox made an intentional decision to not show what months they were including. If they did the same graphic, but only using data from last month it wouldn't look anything like the graphic they published.

I'm saying that one chart doesn't negate the current stats showing how successful these vaccines have been. It simply doesn't. 97-99% of the hospitalizations now are unvaccinated. Similar stats with deaths. They've administered 4.7+ million vaccine doses around the world. The results are clear. I could provide countless sources proving this. Wouldn't matter though. There will be no convincing some of you. But thankfully many people who were previously hesitant have changed their minds. Unfortunately often because they finally saw the results of the virus in someone close to them. Regardless, it's clear to those not drowning in confirmation bias that the vaccines are very effective.

[suzzer99]

As of today, the Camping World Stadium in Orlando will serve as a monoclonal antibody treatment site, open 7 days a week, with a capacity of 320 patients a day.

Expanding access to this treatment will help our most vulnerable stay out of the hospital and save lives. pic.twitter.com/jGl1ClSj6k

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) August 16, 2021

Anti-vaxxers itt - are you ok with monoclonal antibodies? I'm legitimately curious.

[Fish]

Kansas hospitals rejecting transfer patients as COVID-19 cases surge

Kansas hospitals are turning away many transfer patients as coronavirus cases surge across the country.

The University of Kansas Health System is full and only taking a fraction of the patients it normally would from other states.

Health officials report similar situations from other hospitals across the state.

“There was a patient in Salina, Kansas that we couldn’t find a bed for in Kansas,” said Dr. Steven W. Stites, in the Pulmonary and Critical Care Division of Internal Medicine at the University of Kansas Medical Center. " That patient ended up in, I think Oshkosh, Wisconsin. So, this is bad.

[jjjayb]

Originally Posted by O.city

As more people get vaccinated, more cases will happen in vaccinated people. Same with deaths.

Exactly my point. When people keep saying "99% of covid deaths are unvaxed" they are using flawed info. They're using info from when the vaccines weren't widely used. It skews the numbers dramatically.

[jjjayb]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

IMO, the only issue is when people want their personal freedom of choice, which works perfectly good in a vacuum, while giving no shits about how their personal choices impact other people (and their freedom of choice).

It's one thing to say you're uncomfortable with getting the vaccine, but still being cognizant of the fact that you could still end up in an overcrowded hospital or spreading it pre-symptomatically (the latest I've read is asymptotically isn't a big issue), so masking up and not going to large indoor gatherings, etc.

.....and it's another thing to completely ignore the issue, potentially spread it, and expect a hospital bed if you do end up needing one.

Like you said, it is about checking off risk factors, for yourself and others... I just learned someone who's 65 and has been taking care of a 94 year old, and has a 90yo parent, and works in a hospital.... isn't vaccinated, and the only logic I've heard is "not living in fear". That's a lot of risk factors to completely ignore without good reasoning.

And the truth is there are a lot of people out there like that, who really don't have a good reason.

Vaccinated people spread covid too. What's your point?

[jjjayb]

Originally Posted by TLO

I think about this when I've heard of people going to farm stores to buy ivermictin.

Vaccine - Scary!!!
Farm store ivermictin designed for horses - this seems fine.

It's a shame that people are forced to buy "farm ivermectin" which is the same thing as people ivermectin because Dr.s were afraid to prescribe it for fear of reprisal. Billions of Ivermectin doses have been given safely. It's one of the safest drugs on the market.

[jjjayb]

Originally Posted by Fish

It simply doesn't. 97-99% of the hospitalizations now are unvaccinated.

You do realize they don't treat vaccinated and unvaccinated the same in hospitals right? If you are vaccinated they don't test you for covid unless you are symptomatic. If you are un-vaccinated they do test you for covid even if you're asymptomatic.

Put it this way. If both of us go to the hospital because of heart attacks, you are vaccinated, I am not. They will test me for covid, even though I'm not there for Covid. They won't test you. If I show a positive test result, even though I'm not there for Covid, even though I'm asymptomatic, I'm considered "hospitalized with Covid". You won't be. Even if you are positive and asymptomatic just like me. They don't test you.

Why do they do this? Why would I even be considered "covid related hospitalization" when my hospitalization has nothing to do with Covid? I'm there for a heart attack and asymptomatic. There is nothing scientific about this. When you intentionally skew data like this you've lost every bit of trust I would otherwise have in you.

[SupDock]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

You do realize they don't treat vaccinated and unvaccinated the same in hospitals right? If you are vaccinated they don't test you for covid unless you are symptomatic. If you are un-vaccinated they do test you for covid even if you're asymptomatic.

Put it this way. If both of us go to the hospital because of heart attacks, you are vaccinated, I am not. They will test me for covid, even though I'm not there for Covid. They won't test you. If I show a positive test result, even though I'm not there for Covid, even though I'm asymptomatic, I'm considered "hospitalized with Covid". You won't be. Even if you are positive and asymptomatic just like me. They don't test you.

Why do they do this? Why would I even be considered "covid related hospitalization" when my hospitalization has nothing to do with Covid? I'm there for a heart attack and asymptomatic. There is nothing scientific about this. When you intentionally skew data like this you've lost every bit of trust I would otherwise have in you.

Heart attack and asymptomatic? You mean chest pain and shortness of breath along with fatigue? Maybe diaphoretic. Sounds like someone that needs a swab.

This sounds like intentionally skewing data to you?

[KCrockaholic]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

As of today, the Camping World Stadium in Orlando will serve as a monoclonal antibody treatment site, open 7 days a week, with a capacity of 320 patients a day.

Expanding access to this treatment will help our most vulnerable stay out of the hospital and save lives. pic.twitter.com/jGl1ClSj6k

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) August 16, 2021

Anti-vaxxers itt - are you ok with monoclonal antibodies? I'm legitimately curious.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer but I would say why not? If it can cure you once you’re sick then might as well.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

You do realize they don't treat vaccinated and unvaccinated the same in hospitals right? If you are vaccinated they don't test you for covid unless you are symptomatic. If you are un-vaccinated they do test you for covid even if you're asymptomatic.

Put it this way. If both of us go to the hospital because of heart attacks, you are vaccinated, I am not. They will test me for covid, even though I'm not there for Covid. They won't test you. If I show a positive test result, even though I'm not there for Covid, even though I'm asymptomatic, I'm considered "hospitalized with Covid". You won't be. Even if you are positive and asymptomatic just like me. They don't test you.

Why do they do this? Why would I even be considered "covid related hospitalization" when my hospitalization has nothing to do with Covid? I'm there for a heart attack and asymptomatic. There is nothing scientific about this. When you intentionally skew data like this you've lost every bit of trust I would otherwise have in you.

CDC changed their recommendation to now include testing for vaccinated people even when not showing symptoms...

CDC Reverses Guidance on Testing for Fully Vaccinated People

[O.city]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

Exactly my point. When people keep saying "99% of covid deaths are unvaxed" they are using flawed info. They're using info from when the vaccines weren't widely used. It skews the numbers dramatically.

Over 98% of hospitalizations and deaths in my area are from non vaccinated people, per the hospital report for the month of July.

While it has changed numerically as more people get shots, it doens't change the end game.