***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.”

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Apparently you haven't. Or you are just so full of shit you have no ****ing idea of what you're talking about in this case.

ok man

[Donger]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

As testing goes up and the positivity number goes down that is a good thing.

Yes. But that chart isn't showing that.

[SAUTO]

i guess every addict cant help but beat women and children now...

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by petegz28

How can cases go up if positivity goes down? Asking for a friend.....

you're a ****ing idiot

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by petegz28

How can cases go up if positivity goes down? Asking for a friend.....

If you test more people and less are positive , that is good isn't it?

he said testing not cases.

[kgrund]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

As testing goes up and the positivity number goes down that is a good thing.

A piece that has been lacking in so much of the reporting of positive tests is where they are occurring. As we most certainly move forward, more transparency will be required for people to assess their true risk. Outbreaks in nursing homes and prisons that could account for the bulk of a spike are outbreaks worth noting, but likely do not impact the average person's risk in the community compared to a more general spike in cases. As always, numbers do not matter near as much as what makes up a number.

[Pablo]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

i guess every addict cant help but beat women and children now...

Got myself a bottle of Woodford Reserve a little bit ago. The wife, kid and dogs all pissed themselves when I walked in with that bad boy. They know this evening is Hell in a Cell 2020. Once it hits my lips I pull down the shades and put the fist wraps on.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

ok man

Yeah that's what most people and I would lay money that every psychiatrist and other medical professionals would think about your "just choose to not too" avice.

**** people with mental disorders and diseases right? I mean

Why don't alcoholics just simply "choose" not to drink?
Why don't heroin addicts just "choose" not to do drugs?
Why don't bipolar people just "choose" to be happy?
Why don't people suffering from depression just "choose" to not be depressed?
Why don't people who suffer from anxiety just "choose" to chill out?


You know, because it's just that simple according to SAUTO.


Meanwhile there are entire medical fields and professions along with $100's of millions spent every year just getting people to realize "it's just a choice" and **** anything else it might be.

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Fox Business literally just had a banner saying cases were up 2.4% nationally. I wish they could all read the same Magic 8 Ball at the same time.

They are reporting two different things. This is total case, the other is % of tests that are positive. Both will go up as you test more, but its a good leading indicator if % of cases is falling, obv total cases falling to 0 is the ultimate goal

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Monticore

If you test more people and less are positive , that is good isn't it?

he said testing not cases.

OMG and I though the "Asking for a friend" was a huge sarcasm flag

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by The PMII Hypothesis

They are reporting two different things. This is total case, the other is % of tests that are positive. Both will go up as you test more, but its a good leading indicator if % of cases is falling, obv total cases falling to 0 is the ultimate goal

Yes, I know, initially misread the chart. I tried to make light of that fact but apparently I didn't do enough

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

you're a ****ing idiot

And you're a dick....

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

many people in this world have anger, dependence, bipolar whatever and dont kill themselves or beat women and children. because they choose not to.

Many people in this world get COVID-19 and have minimal/no symptoms.

90% of the people who have complications from COVID-19 and drain hospital capacity have underlying health conditions that result from bad CHOICES.

Being obese, being diabetic (95% of diabetics in the US have the lifestyle-caused Type 2 version), and having hypertension... all conditions from bad lifestyle choices.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Yeah that's what most people and I would lay money that every psychiatrist and other medical professionals would think about your "just choose to not too" avice.

**** people with mental disorders and diseases right? I mean

Why don't alcoholics just simply "choose" not to drink?
Why don't heroin addicts just "choose" not to do drugs?
Why don't bipolar people just "choose" to be happy?
Why don't people suffering from depression just "choose" to not be depressed?
Why don't people who suffer from anxiety just "choose" to chill out?


You know, because it's just that simple according to SAUTO.

Meanwhile there are entire medical fields and professions along with $100's of millions spent every year just getting people to realize "it's just a choice" and **** anything else it might be.

My mom had mental health issues and was a smoker and she chose not to get help or take the meds my wife prescribed. Lung CA got her at 62

My dad was a drinker and a smoker and he chose to get help and quit both .

both had the same access and opportunity to get better one chose not to do so.

I understand the underlying condition might not be a choice .

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Monticore

My mom had mental health issues and was a smoker and she chose not to get help or take the meds my wife prescribed. Lung CA got her at 62

My dad was a drinker and a smoker and he chose to get help and quit both .

both had the same access and opportunity to get better one chose not to do so.

I understand the underlying condition might not be a choice .

Well gee, that solves it. You and SAUTO can tell all the people it's just a choice and quit going to your doctors, taking your meds and talking with your shrinks.


Who knew it was just that simple, heh?

If your point you are trying to make is just because you smoke and drink doesn't make you a child or spouse abuser I would agree. Other than that I fail to see what your point is?