***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.”

[tk13]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath15

I can only speak for myself, but I'm having a hard time finding the middle ground.

Even WITH the guidelines in place, there are still a LOT of people out running around, not wearing masks, not distancing. People are already acting reckless. Lots of reasons why, and that's for another thread.

We saw yesterday in Florida thousands on the beach in JAX within 30 minutes of the order being lifted.

I'd be shocked if people don't take advantage of the situation when the opportunity presents itself. Give an inch, they'll take a mile. Then we're right back to February, and the late March/early April is really gonna suck this time.

As if 37k dead didn't suck enough.

That's because people are lying to themselves to feel better. That's harsh but probably true. We have pretty much shut down the country and some areas are actually doing a good job, and we're still going to have a million cases that we know about, and tens of thousands of deaths.

The real issue is that people are able to use this virus to blame the economy. When things re-open we aren't going to have that excuse, and it's going to be a bad situation when the economy stays in the tank because life actually doesn't go back to normal. And then you'll see businesses shutting down like that pork plant because people are spreading it around. That's going to be horrible for the economy.

There is no middle ground. The economy will be fine when people can go about their lives without the fear of catching this thing.

[jdubya]

Originally Posted by Donger

The estimates of deaths without mitigation was between 1 and 2.2 million. So no, not countless.

What models were those numbers from?

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by Donger

It's up to the governors, really.

If you want to get technical about it then yes but my point still stands. Our politicians have all the information, it is up to them to make the correct decision. Im trusting them on this when they say they are ready to ease restrictions.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

More philosophical than political, but certainly entirely in keeping with the discussion already going on.

I can't help wondering, for the national conversations of the future, supposing everything DOES work out for the most part, and people get back on their feet, . . . will there be any worth or contemplation to be had when people starting complaining that the wealthy are too greedy, and the wealthy of the future reply 'Bitch!, . . . remember when we put everything on hold and in absolute peril to save your ****ing life?'

And of the courtesy clerks and cashiers that were risking theirs for $10/hour?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by jdubya

What models were those numbers from?

I don't believe that Dr. Birx provided that information specific to those figures, but we know they are utilizing at least a models.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by jdubya

It`s definitely helped for sure but stopping this economy is unsustainable. I was just questioning "countless". We dont really know how many lives may or may not have been saved. It`s based on models which are about as accurate as I am when throwing a baseball with my foot. I think our CIC knows this economic shutdown is unsustainable for much longer so we are going to have to get back to work very soon and learn to deal with this new virus

Poor choice of words what I meant by countless was millions of lives which I think is safe to say.

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

And of the courtesy clerks and cashiers that were risking theirs for $10/hour?

Screw them, they're poor people.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

And of the courtesy clerks and cashiers that were risking theirs for $10/hour?

Originally Posted by stumppy

Screw them, they're poor people.

So, status quo . . .

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

So, status quo . . .

It's not status quo, it's a rebuttal to point of view that this sacrifice is somehow asymmetrical in both intent and risk.

[Monticore]

If we didn't close things down I think most of the businesses would still be struggling with a lot of the work force getting sick , and knowing 1 restaurant worker is positive a lot of people might not chose to go there.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

I didn't assert a POV, I asked a question.
Like I said I want to avoid the politics of it, but it appears that this might be an impossible ask.
You want to discuss the merits of different POVs, I'd be game. But I don't think the mods would assent.

There is, however, an asymmetry. People who risk to continue to perform work duties do have a choice. There's a safety net for those who don't feel able, and they are not being prohibited OR commanded by force of law.

This is definitely not the place to have this debate, because I don't think it's very stable ground to argue that a question phrased like this is not loaded:

will there be any worth or contemplation to be had when people starting complaining that the wealthy are too greedy, and the wealthy of the future reply 'Bitch!, . . . remember when we put everything on hold and in absolute peril to save your ****ing life?'

[TLO]

Originally Posted by jdubya

What models were those numbers from?

Originally Posted by Donger

I don't believe that Dr. Birx provided that information specific to those figures, but we know they are utilizing at least a models.

I believe the big scary number came from the Imperial College in London. I believe those were the numbers shown assuming no social distancing was put into place. (Up to 2.2 million American deaths)

That model then backed everything way, way down not too long after. For example they predicted 500k deaths in the UK, then backed it down to 50k.I'm unsure of the variables that led to this back off.

Not long after that, the White House showed a model that predicted 100k - 240k Americans dying even with social distancing measures in place.

We then learned that the model the White House was using was very similar to the IHME model we all know and love. I distinctly remember Dr. Birx referencing this.

Dr. Fauci then explained that models are good, but we can't base all of our decisions on them. (So many different variables that go into models)

[Monticore]

As far as sports go some league maybe not want to play without fans not all league have huge tv contracts/sponsors.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by stumppy

Screw them, they're poor people.

Apparently we don't mind putting them out of work and causing their employers to go out of business so wtf?

[petegz28]

So NY's first reading today is 540 new deaths. By far their lowest in weeks. Now, are they going to report again or is this the only report? They've been going back and forth lately. Yesterday was really weird but whatever.