***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.”

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Never for measles and smallpox.

Please provide a link.


Shingles I think it's about time. This is for old people whose immune systems have declined.

How do you catch shingles?
You do not "catch" shingles – it comes on when there's a reactivation of chickenpox virus that's already in your body.

After you've recovered from chickenpox, the varicella-zoster virus lies dormant in your nerve cells and can reactivate at a later stage when your immune system is weakened.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccin...s-and-answers/

Hate to break it to you but I don't think I've aged 4 decades since when I got Covid in August...

They gave both measles and smallpox to virtually everyone. The Smallpox push especially gave rise to early anti-vax sentiment because they forced it on the poor in Europe.

You are the one making claims with no factual basis. You do the research yourself as I'm not going to spoon feed it to you. Perhaps next time you'll fact check your sources instead of just repeating the memes you read ad nauseam.

Also, you are making the case for me with your chicken pox argument.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by O.city

Varicella is very similar to the Herpes virus in that it lays dormant in your nerves (iirc). It's really interesting.

I get cold sores, have since I was little. If I get sun burned or am really stressed or get sick, I will always get them. They're HSV 1 then you've got 2 that is more...private parts related.

I think having 1 gives you some immunity to 2 , probably the only positive.

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Additional risk, no benefit.

The point of the vaccine was to simulate encountering the virus without getting sick.

I don't need a simulation, my body just dealt with the real thing.


The only benefit would be to show politicians I am personally compliant and obedient. To me that is not really a benefit.

^this^ I also had Covid in 2020 and my doctor said the risk of getting the vaccine probably exceeds the risk of getting a serious case of Covid at this point. It may change as we get further out with more info. He also said, if I hadn't had Covid that he would do anything he could do to convince me to get vaccinated. This is a reasonable position that is getting attacked...

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

They gave both measles and smallpox to virtually everyone. The Smallpox push especially gave rise to early anti-vax sentiment because they forced it on the poor in Europe.

You are the one making claims with no factual basis. You do the research yourself as I'm not going to spoon feed it to you. Perhaps next time you'll fact check your sources instead of just repeating the memes you read ad nauseam.

Also, you are making the case for me with your chicken pox argument.

Do you think the CDC Kentucky study was good science?

[jdubya]

Numbers continue to lower in my county of 1.1 million. 86 hospitalized with covid, 39 in ICU with Covid. Not bad

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Do you think the CDC Kentucky study was good science?

Why are you stuck on a moot point when it is merely one data point in a constellation of much better data?

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

Why are you stuck on a moot point when it is merely one data point in a constellation of much better data?

It's a yes or no question.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief

^this^ I also had Covid in 2020 and my doctor said the risk of getting the vaccine probably exceeds the risk of getting a serious case of Covid at this point. It may change as we get further out with more info. He also said, if I hadn't had Covid that he would do anything he could do to convince me to get vaccinated. This is a reasonable position that is getting attacked...

I think that's a reasonable way to put it. If I had gotten Covid early and recovered, I would've been less urgent about getting the vaccine. I would've still gotten it, because I haven't heard that there's a risk in the vaccine that exceeds the risk of getting Covid a second time (and other stuff like helping to defend society against variants). But if there's a risk that I'm not aware of, then yeah, weighing the risks of a second round of Covid versus the risks of a vaccine makes sense.

I feel like some are making the argument that it's better to get Covid going forward than to get the vaccine, and that's the argument that makes no sense at all to me. Getting Covid while unvaccinated to build natural immunity is a bad bet to make compared to getting vaccinated.

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

It's a yes or no question.

Next time you answer a yes/no question properly, we can revisit it.

No wins for you on a technicality when your point in general is totally wrong.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

Next time you answer a yes/no question properly, we can revisit it.

No wins for you on a technicality when your point in general is totally wrong.

So, I'll take that as a yes.




No wonder you are so confused and all over the place if you think that CDC study was actual science and not data manipulation.



Moving on, please explain the mechanics of how a vaccine would improve my health after I have already recovered from the disease a month ago.

[Ninerfan11]

Merck, lol.


What a joke.

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

So, I'll take that as a yes.




No wonder you are so confused and all over the place if you think that CDC study was actual science and not data manipulation.



Moving on, please explain the mechanics of how a vaccine would improve my health after I have already recovered from the disease a month ago.

No, everyone but you sees the desperation you have to be right in your stance.

The evidence is overwhelmingly against your position.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

No, everyone but you sees the desperation you have to be right in your stance.

The evidence is overwhelmingly against your position.

I think I'll go with Martin Kuldorff's view that natural immunity is superior to the vaccine immunity.

He has called your view a fringe position in science.

The @CDCDirector belongs to a fringe group of scientists who question natural immunity after #COVID disease, even though it is strong and much stronger than vaccine immunity. https://t.co/Yo7JHFvh60 https://t.co/d14kTPnCWk

— Martin Kulldorff (@MartinKulldorff) September 23, 2021

Martin Kulldorff
Professor
mkulldorff@bwh.harvard.edu
Martin Kulldorff, PhD, is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist in the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women’s Hospital. His research centers on developing and applying new disease surveillance methods for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance and for the early detection and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks.

https://www.drugepi.org/team/martin-kulldorff

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think that's a reasonable way to put it. If I had gotten Covid early and recovered, I would've been less urgent about getting the vaccine. I would've still gotten it, because I haven't heard that there's a risk in the vaccine that exceeds the risk of getting Covid a second time (and other stuff like helping to defend society against variants). But if there's a risk that I'm not aware of, then yeah, weighing the risks of a second round of Covid versus the risks of a vaccine makes sense.

I feel like some are making the argument that it's better to get Covid going forward than to get the vaccine, and that's the argument that makes no sense at all to me. Getting Covid while unvaccinated to build natural immunity is a bad bet to make compared to getting vaccinated.

Time will tell, I am in my early 50's, barely, and healthy with no comorbidities. I am not disappointed that I got Covid. I was rundown and some slight cold symptoms for 5-6 days and came through nicely, as do most people that are healthy and less than 60. Some studies show that this natural immunity could last for years and years, if so, that beats the heck out of getting a shot every fall.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

I think I'll go with Martin Kuldorff's view that natural immunity is superior to the vaccine immunity.

He has called your view a fringe position in science.

The @CDCDirector belongs to a fringe group of scientists who question natural immunity after #COVID disease, even though it is strong and much stronger than vaccine immunity. https://t.co/Yo7JHFvh60 https://t.co/d14kTPnCWk

— Martin Kulldorff (@MartinKulldorff) September 23, 2021

Martin Kulldorff
Professor
mkulldorff@bwh.harvard.edu
Martin Kulldorff, PhD, is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist in the Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women’s Hospital. His research centers on developing and applying new disease surveillance methods for post-market drug and vaccine safety surveillance and for the early detection and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks.

https://www.drugepi.org/team/martin-kulldorff

Yeah, that's the dummy that created the "Great Barrington Declaration." He wanted to eliminate all restrictions except for nursing homes, and let people catch covid in order to reach herd immunity. Looking back, that could have been disastrous...