***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.”

[Donger]

Originally Posted by TLO

I have a question about cases.

Nobody seems to put much stock into "well we're testing more, therefore we're finding more cases."

My question is this. We all remember the stories back in March and April of individuals that were sick and couldn't get a test because of the ridiculously stringent guidelines.

Isn't it feasible we're finding many more asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic cases that are leading to some of the increase?

I'm not saying this is the lone reason for the increase.. but doesn't it seem likely to be playing some role?

Maybe. But there's no getting around the positivity increases. And hospitalizations.

[Ninerfan11]

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Ninerfan11

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

You had to go there....you just had to go there

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Ninerfan11

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Ninerfan11

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S...534-8/fulltext

This study is bad, because reasons

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by TLO

I have a question about cases.

Nobody seems to put much stock into "well we're testing more, therefore we're finding more cases."

My question is this. We all remember the stories back in March and April of individuals that were sick and couldn't get a test because of the ridiculously stringent guidelines.

Isn't it feasible we're finding many more asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic cases that are leading to some of the increase?

I'm not saying this is the lone reason for the increase.. but doesn't it seem likely to be playing some role?

Originally Posted by kgrund

This is a perfect example of how dangerous it is when people just accept numbers at face value without thinking. Do both of you really believe that any reported number TODAY has any comparative value to any number reported then?! This just in: testing rates have gone way way up since then. In March we were not even getting the tip of the iceberg.

🗽When New York City’s Covid case count peaked in late March, there were 5,000 new cases a day, and more than 60% of tests were coming back positive.

🌵In Arizona, new cases are currently averaging about 3,000 a day and about 20% of tests are positive https://t.co/hAUlB6tJcA

— Bloomberg Opinion (@bopinion) July 2, 2020

[Donger]

Originally Posted by petegz28

��When New York City’s Covid case count peaked in late March, there were 5,000 new cases a day, and more than 60% of tests were coming back positive.

��In Arizona, new cases are currently averaging about 3,000 a day and about 20% of tests are positive https://t.co/hAUlB6tJcA

— Bloomberg Opinion (@bopinion) July 2, 2020

That's wrong. At peak they were having 10,000 new cases a day. They didn't get below 5,000 new cases/day until early May.

And, Arizona had a 70% positivity rate when they started testing. All states did, for obvious reasons.

[kgrund]

Originally Posted by Donger

Actually, in NY in late March to April (when they saw the highest number of new cases around April 16), they were testing in the 30,000 tests/day range. Florida doesn't seem to be as consistent, for whatever reason, but they are around 35,000/day now.

Fair enough, but you do realize that the "high" in NY was likely not close to actual highs that would have resulted in mid March. The numbers would have likely been several factors higher would be my guess. Even the tests given then could be questioned more than now. As bad as applying tests are now they were far worse then. I remember reading a number of articles back then discussing how poorly those drive thru testing centers were performing tests that were resulting in a significant number of undercounting of likely cases.

The bigger point is we should be very cautious when comparing current numbers to those in the past. Apples to oranges. In fact we should all know by now that these numbers are so screwed up that they provide limited value in truly telling us what when on then and what is going on now. There is a reason that when people invest big dollars in things they ask for audited numbers.

[ChiTown]

This pissing contest in this thread is both epic and quite frankly gross.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by kgrund

Fair enough, but you do realize that the "high" in NY was likely not close to actual highs that would have resulted in mid March. The numbers would have likely been several factors higher would be my guess. Even the tests given then could be questioned more than now. As bad as applying tests are now they were far worse then. I remember reading a number of articles back then discussing how poorly those drive thru testing centers were performing tests that were resulting in a significant number of undercounting of likely cases.

The bigger point is we should be very cautious when comparing current numbers to those in the past. Apples to oranges. In fact we should all know by now that these numbers are so screwed up that they provide limited value in truly telling us what when on then and what is going on now. There is a reason that when people invest big dollars in things they ask for audited numbers.

Sorry, but I don't understand the point(s) you are trying to make.

[lewdog]

Pete is still a moron. I think his favorite line is “I believe.....”

Good to see.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by ChiTown

This pissing contest in this thread is both epic and quite frankly gross.

It weirdly largely correlates with my personal impressions of who on this board I have always viewed as intelligent (outside of political or COVID stances) and not so much. It's obviously VERY subjective and means nothing but I found it interesting.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by lewdog

Pete is still a moron. I think his favorite line is “I believe.....”

Good to see.

Yeah? And you're ugly

[TLO]

Originally Posted by kgrund

This is a perfect example of how dangerous it is when people just accept numbers at face value without thinking. Do both of you really believe that any reported number TODAY has any comparative value to any number reported then?! This just in: testing rates have gone way way up since then. In March we were not even getting the tip of the iceberg.

Which is why when you look at the serological studies, you get an estimate (even if the studies/tests are somewhat flawed) of just how many cases we missed.

The CDC itself said for every case diagnosed, 10 go undiagnosed.

Factor in that you pretty much have a coin flip chance of showing symptoms or not...

[BigCatDaddy]

Originally Posted by ChiTown

This pissing contest in this thread is both epic and quite frankly gross.

I usually just scroll down and see who lost and x out. If someone different post (like you) I actually read it.