***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.”

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by loochy

No. People were still free to move, mingle, and leave.

He means NO ins or outs, military blockades on all roads, no air or boat traffic, etc...national guard patrolling the streets and not letting anyone come out...you know, Wuhan-esque

But it still would have popped up and ignited elsewhere. It was inevitable.

Exactly. We aren't Italy. We aren't Germany. Our country is the size of their entire continent, generally speaking. We are spread out much more. We have a completely different type of economy.

And we still have less deaths per capita than Italy. Of all the places she picked I don't know that she could have picked a worse one.

And this morning I saw a blurb that the nursing home deaths in NY are more closer to 11,000 than 6,600. So a decent portion of our deaths came from some not-so-smart decisions on the part of some of our governors as well.

[kgrund]

I think just as many questions will need to be answered when the dust settles such as (1) did we need to lockdown at all? (2) was the PCR test really the best test to utilize to monitor this pandemic? and (3) why was the public health reporting so poor that it never gave the general public a true sense of the extent of the pandemic at any point in time? These are just three questions that could easily linger as long as whether or not we should have had an aggressive lockdown IMO.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by kgrund

I think just as many questions will need to be answered when the dust settles such as (1) did we need to lockdown at all? (2) was the PCR test really the best test to utilize to monitor this pandemic? and (3) why was the public health reporting so poor that it never gave the general public a true sense of the extent of the pandemic at any point in time? These are just three questions that could easily linger as long as whether or not we should have had an aggressive lockdown IMO.

I think the answer to question 1 is most definitely a yes. We did need to lockdown to a point until we saw what it was we were dealing with. We didn't know what would happen to the hospitals so a few weeks to determine that was needed.

That being said I think we stayed locked down way to long for some things such as elective procedures and some of the small businesses. Fear was and still is what is driving our decisions though people will claim it's the data. When I see the data I don't see proportional responses. I think in many cases the responses are based in fear and not the data. I know several will disagree with me on that but that's how things go.

I will keep referring to the schools as an example of reacting to fear and not the data. In my state at least and particularly my county there is no evidence in any data that there should not be an in-person option. There isn't any data to suggest that Teachers or students are in any more danger from Covid than yes, wait for it, the flu at this point.

According to the CDC 185 children died from the flu this past flu season. According to the CDC there have only been 86 deaths from Covid in kids 0-18. I don't know what the underlyings were in those but I will take it all at face value.

I will say that there needs to be accommodations for Teachers with high risk but by in large the data in and of itself does not show that children are at any more risk than they are during flu season. In fact, the data as I see says the opposite to be honest.

I just think that the school situation is a good example of allowing fear to dictate policy and not the data. The exceptions being places like LA where there was a hard run on the hospitals. We don't want people dying from lack of resources. But other than that for the majority of the country the data says it is safe to get back to school.


My long-winded rant aside, the other two questions you pose are very good ones.

[KCUnited]

Imagine ordering a lockdown around the same time we told people to stop buying masks because they weren't effective

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Imagine ordering a lockdown around the same time we told people to stop buying masks because they weren't effective

Yea there is a ton of revisionist history with the timeline going on. Hindsight is 20/20 as they say.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Yea there is a ton of revisionist history with the timeline going on. Hindsight is 20/20 as they say.

Indeed. Its almost like we have learned more and more about covid-19 the more we were exposed to it.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Indeed. Its almost like we have learned more and more about covid-19 the more we were exposed to it.

No shit but that's not nearly the same as assigning blame for what we didn't do then based only on what we know now.

[O.city]

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...safe-reopening

[O.city]

Absolutely massive protests have erupted across South Korea. Protestors are demanding a loosing of #COVID19 restrictions. pic.twitter.com/VWfdCToaUz

— SV News �� (@SVNewsAlerts) August 17, 2020

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by O.city

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...safe-reopening

We’ve been saying this is likely the case for a few months now:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/17/h...-immunity.html

Still a lot of “maybes” and “could be’s” but anyone who’s been paying attention can see this is almost certainly the case.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Imagine ordering a lockdown around the same time we told people to stop buying masks because they weren't effective

There was the mask ordeal. There was political infighting all over the media about the travel ban to China. There were politicians saying to come party in Chinatown because it was safe. I mean you had a lot of early messaging both medically and politically that set the tone going forward.

Then after they started to get people to come along willfully or not you had the "protests". And with those you had medical professionals excusing and even encouraging them so I think that caused a lot of people to throw their hands up about a lot too. I mean it's a hard sell to a lot of people at that point.

[O.city]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...rce=reddit.com

[Demonpenz]

Originally Posted by jdubya

I wonder how many are symptomatic and/or hospitalized.

Lotsm. Complete failure on UNC

[O.city]

Interesting paper in @AnnalsofIM on #COVID19 contact tracing

Attack rate highly correlated with symptom severity; minimal transmission from asymptomatic carriers

As children ? most likely to be asymptomatic, could explain low levels of transmissionhttps://t.co/wqSESWHErF pic.twitter.com/9LRwaHRhR7

— Alasdair Munro (@apsmunro) August 18, 2020

[Kidd Lex]

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02400-7

More good news. Starting to look like the IFR from antibody tests is still high, and that many people won’t show on antibody testing but do have t-cell protection.