***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.”

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by DaFace

As an interesting hypothetical for those strongly in the "open everything up" camp:

Would you welcome a group of 10 tourists from NYC to come and dine at your favorite restaurant in your community next week? If not, what restrictions would you want to remain in place?

I wouldn't give a shit because I wouldn't go to a restaurant. Go for it.......

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

I wouldn't give a shit because I wouldn't go to a restaurant. Go for it.......

You literally never go to restaurants? You're weirder than I even realized.

[BigCatDaddy]

[QUOTE=SAUTO;14954113]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

You're 100% wrong, the same amount of people would be infected regardless of efforts put in place. Experts have said this over and over and over again.[/QUOTE


link? because that makes no sense at all.

"If all you do is flatten the curve, you don't prevent deaths or severe cases. You just change the dates. We don't want to do that," Katz said.

Dr. David Katz

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by DaFace

You literally never go to restaurants? You're weirder than I even realized.

No I order take out, I live in Texas and can order a gallon of frozen margarita's to go.......

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

I wouldn't give a shit because I wouldn't go to a restaurant. Go for it.......

Would you give a shit if one of the workers at that restaurant goes grocery shopping five days later and infects a family member?

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by petegz28

I have heard several say focus on deaths and hospitalizations and not necessarily cases.

Do you have a good source for trend data on hospitalizations? I like that one as a balance between deaths and cases, but I haven't seen a good source for it.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Monticore

So people screaming at the inaccuracies of the COVID models and guestimates are going all in on the financial models and guestimates.

Originally Posted by DaFace

Interesting observation.

SO economic modeling is just as murky and unknown as novel pandemic modeling.

Now do climate. . . .

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

Would you give a shit if one of the workers at that restaurant goes grocery shopping five days later and infects a family member?

No I wouldn't give a shit, but then again I'm not afraid of my own shadow.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Monticore

So people screaming at the inaccuracies of the COVID models and guestimates are going all in on the financial models and guestimates.

Originally Posted by DaFace

Interesting observation.

So economic modeling is exactly as murky and hypothetical as novel pandemic modeling.

Now do climate. . . .

[DaFace]

Whoa, IHME just updated their state data with all sorts of crazy new stuff. Not sure what any of it really means, but it's fun to explore for the chart geeks.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/unite...erica/colorado

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by DaFace

As an interesting hypothetical for those strongly in the "open everything up" camp:

Would you welcome a group of 10 tourists from NYC to come and dine at your favorite restaurant in your community next week? If not, what restrictions would you want to remain in place?

As long as they were not in a high risk group or were not exposing themselves to people in a high risk group (i.e. visiting a nursing home), I would 100% welcome them and their positive impact on the local economy.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

So economic modeling is exactly as murky and hypothetical as novel pandemic modeling.

Now do climate. . . .

Not sure the relevance, but yes, climate modeling is iffy as well. Past trends are a lot more clear on that one, but predicting the future is tough no matter what the subject.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by DaFace

As an interesting hypothetical for those strongly in the "open everything up" camp:

Would you welcome a group of 10 tourists from NYC to come and dine at your favorite restaurant in your community next week? If not, what restrictions would you want to remain in place?

Bring them on in. What we know now is this following:

They've had it and recovered
They don't have it
They are perpetually asymptotic

If I get it I will most likely be fine
If I get it I have a better chance of being asymptomatic than sypmtomatic
I won't get it


For restrictions I would have my bussers wear masks and gloves and ask servers to insure they aren't getting up in someone's face when they talk and wear gloves when they serve the food.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

No I wouldn't give a shit, but then again I'm not afraid of my own shadow.

Excellent.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Whoa, IHME just updated their state data with all sorts of crazy new stuff. Not sure what any of it really means, but it's fun to explore for the chart geeks.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/unite...erica/colorado

They did MO's with all the relaxation of stuff and it didn't seem to change a lot? Am I reading that right?