***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.”

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by penguinz

You are comparing a virus to bacteria. Not remotely the same thing.

Viruses get weaker as they mutate. That is how they survive.

Right. Bacteria dont care if we live or die.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Black Death wasn't a virus, it was bacteria.

Virology 101 is viruses don't want to kill their hosts and tend to get weaker.

This was to be expected. The 4 common circulating coronaviruses probably operated the same way with the last one believed to have arrived late 1800s and is now a common cold.

Originally Posted by penguinz

You are comparing a virus to bacteria. Not remotely the same thing.

Viruses get weaker as they mutate. That is how they survive.

Eh, that's not necessarily true. So much of it has to do with the host/virus interaction. It's not really cut and dry like that.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

Eh, that's not necessarily true. So much of it has to do with the host/virus interaction. It's not really cut and dry like that.

Well, the introduction of leaky vaccines could change this but I didn't want to bring those up in a "non-political" thread.

If you look at Alpha, Beta, Delta...the data shows the CFR dropping with the variants becoming a bit more transmissable.

Scientists consider this possible because that’s how the four endemic coronaviruses, called OC43, 229E, NL63 and HKU1, behave. At least three of these viruses have probably been circulating in human populations for hundreds of years; two of them are responsible for roughly 15% of respiratory infections. Using data from previous studies, Lavine and her colleagues developed a model that shows how most children first come down with these viruses before the age of 6 and develop immunity to them1. That defence wanes pretty quickly so it is not sufficient to block reinfection entirely, but it seems to protect adults from getting sick.


Jesse Bloom, an evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, thinks the coronavirus might follow a similar path. “I do think SARS-CoV-2 will become a less serious problem and something like flu,” he says. Shaman and others say the virus could also settle into a seasonal pattern of annual winter outbreaks similar to flu.

[MahomesMagic]

Someone down voted scientists who believe the virus will become weaker?!

Looks like someone doesn't want this to end.
.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Someone down voted scientists who believe the virus will become weaker?!

Looks like someone doesn't want this to end.
.

More likely your goofy persistent claims of "Leaky" vaccines. The vaccines have more than proven themselves at this point.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Fish

More likely your goofy persistent claims of "Leaky" vaccines. The vaccines have more than proven themselves at this point.

Looks like you might want to learn what leaky vaccines are before you opine on the subject.

You are obviously clueless.

[lawrenceRaider]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Looks like you might want to learn what leaky vaccines are before you opine on the subject.

You are obviously clueless.

As he said, you are clueless or a purposeful spreader of misinformation.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider

As he said, you are clueless or a purposeful spreader of misinformation.

Many animal vaccines are known as leaky vaccines, which means they reduce symptoms but people can still be infected by the viruses. Most human vaccines, such as for polio, and the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine are perfect vaccines, so they also stop transmission of the disease in question, Read said. (It's not clear why some vaccines are leaky, but diseases where the body does a good job of creating lifelong immunity after a single exposure, such as for childhood diseases like measles, seem to be more suited to the development of perfect vaccines, Read added.)
https://www.livescience.com/51682-va...r-viruses.html

Leaky vaccines are here defined as vaccines which reduce symptoms but don't stop infection.

Care to explain why you believe the Covid-19 shots don't fit this definition?!

Go ahead, this will be fun.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Well, the introduction of leaky vaccines could change this but I didn't want to bring those up in a "non-political" thread.

If you look at Alpha, Beta, Delta...the data shows the CFR dropping with the variants becoming a bit more transmissable.

Scientists consider this possible because that’s how the four endemic coronaviruses, called OC43, 229E, NL63 and HKU1, behave. At least three of these viruses have probably been circulating in human populations for hundreds of years; two of them are responsible for roughly 15% of respiratory infections. Using data from previous studies, Lavine and her colleagues developed a model that shows how most children first come down with these viruses before the age of 6 and develop immunity to them1. That defence wanes pretty quickly so it is not sufficient to block reinfection entirely, but it seems to protect adults from getting sick.


Jesse Bloom, an evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, thinks the coronavirus might follow a similar path. “I do think SARS-CoV-2 will become a less serious problem and something like flu,” he says. Shaman and others say the virus could also settle into a seasonal pattern of annual winter outbreaks similar to flu.

Well, I've not really seen evidence of that yet, so it's not necessarily discussion yet. Some have advocated that it's happening, but I'm not sure.

It's just not cut and dry that they "evolve" into lesser pathogenicity. Unlike bacteria, viruses can't genetically change unless they have human cells to replicate it. Especially in a disease like Covid, the patient mortality happens a while post viral peak or infection so it's not really being pressured to become less virulent at this point. Atleast it would seem not to be. Unless we got lucky.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

Well, I've not really seen evidence of that yet, so it's not necessarily discussion yet. Some have advocated that it's happening, but I'm not sure.

It's just not cut and dry that they "evolve" into lesser pathogenicity. Unlike bacteria, viruses can't genetically change unless they have human cells to replicate it. Especially in a disease like Covid, the patient mortality happens a while post viral peak or infection so it's not really being pressured to become less virulent at this point. Atleast it would seem not to be. Unless we got lucky.

3 reasons.

1.History. We have a history of novel, semi-novel viruses getting introduced and becoming less virulent in humans over time.

2.Data. The data we have on case fatality rate shows the variants CFR is dropping...significantly from Alpha.

3. Evolutionary Theory. If a virus is too deadly and kills its host it won't be able to transmit and replicate to other as much. This is what we see with viruses like Ebola. Deadly but too deadly to cause mass-infection.


Can you name examples of viruses over time strengthening in nature and becoming more virulent?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Many animal vaccines are known as leaky vaccines, which means they reduce symptoms but people can still be infected by the viruses. Most human vaccines, such as for polio, and the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine are perfect vaccines, so they also stop transmission of the disease in question, Read said. (It's not clear why some vaccines are leaky, but diseases where the body does a good job of creating lifelong immunity after a single exposure, such as for childhood diseases like measles, seem to be more suited to the development of perfect vaccines, Read added.)
https://www.livescience.com/51682-va...r-viruses.html

Leaky vaccines are here defined as vaccines which reduce symptoms but don't stop infection.

Care to explain why you believe the Covid-19 shots don't fit this definition?!

Go ahead, this will be fun.

You're misinterpreting that study.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

3 reasons.

1.History. We have a history of novel, semi-novel viruses getting introduced and becoming less virulent in humans over time.

2.Data. The data we have on case fatality rate shows the variants CFR is dropping...significantly from Alpha.

3. Evolutionary Theory. If a virus is too deadly and kills its host it won't be able to transmit and replicate to other as much. This is what we see with viruses like Ebola. Deadly but too deadly to cause mass-infection.


Can you name examples of viruses over time strengthening in nature and becoming more virulent?

Over time, sure. Time being quite a bit more than a year or so.

Again, you're simplifying this too much. It isn't necessarily the way it works.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Many animal vaccines are known as leaky vaccines, which means they reduce symptoms but people can still be infected by the viruses. Most human vaccines, such as for polio, and the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine are perfect vaccines, so they also stop transmission of the disease in question, Read said. (It's not clear why some vaccines are leaky, but diseases where the body does a good job of creating lifelong immunity after a single exposure, such as for childhood diseases like measles, seem to be more suited to the development of perfect vaccines, Read added.)
https://www.livescience.com/51682-va...r-viruses.html

Leaky vaccines are here defined as vaccines which reduce symptoms but don't stop infection.

Care to explain why you believe the Covid-19 shots don't fit this definition?!

Go ahead, this will be fun.

OK, sure.

You're misinterpreting that study. Actually, you're simply repeating what Joe Rogan misinterpreted about that study.

Here's a response about that from the author of the study himself, Andrew Read:

Are mRNA vaccines ‘leaky’?

Rogan seems to think that mRNA vaccines are quite leaky because of breakthrough infections. Read points out that no vaccine is 100% effective. Although we still need more data to determine how leaky they are, the rate of breakthrough infections in vaccinated people remains statistically low enough to consider the mRNA vaccines highly effective at preventing infection.

“We don't know at the moment how leaky these things are. It's conceivable that they are actually close to non-leaky. I'm amazed how good these mRNA vaccines are. They're incredibly good.”

Read’s very concerned that misrepresentation of his research is causing vaccine hesitancy.

“The study was tweeted a thousand times last night, according to our metrics,” says Read. “I had a physician in England reach out to me on Friday asking me to [clarify] because his patients are using my paper to argue against vaccination.” Calling into question the effectiveness of vaccines was never the intention of his 2015 study. “I am genuinely shocked. I've been doing work for 20 years now on how vaccines might drive the evolution of viruses. There's nothing in any of that 20 years work that argues in favor of withholding lifesaving vaccines. It's just shocking to me.” He adds, “There are 600,000 Americans dead so far. The vast majority of those deaths are vaccine-preventable. There's not a single scenario that would argue in favor of not using [vaccines] to save the next hundred thousand. Not one scenario.”

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/andream...vaccine-study/

Direct words from the author. "I'm amazed how good these mRNA vaccines are. They're incredibly good.”

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

You're misinterpreting that study.

I posted the definition of leaky vaccines, not my thoughts on the study

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Fish

OK, sure.

You're misrepresenting that study. Actually, you're simply repeating what Joe Rogan misinterpreted about that study.

Here's a response about that from the author of the study himself, Andrew Read:



Direct words from the author. "I'm amazed how good these mRNA vaccines are. They're incredibly good.”

That has nothing to do with the definition of leaky vaccines.

I would change the subject too if I just stuck my foot in my mouth like you did though.