***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.”

[Fish]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Other outlets are doing the same. Who gets to arbitrate what sites are "political" and what ones aren't?

This discussion is supposed to be apolitical but a big part of remaining that way is remaining impartial as well.

I care more about validity than source. I don't see any other respectable outlets pushing this misinformation any longer. Some other outlets did the same many months ago, yes. But once it was explained by experts how death certificates and comorbidities worked, the misrepresentation stopped. Misinformation should be labeled as so regardless of source. That said, it takes about 2 grams of common sense to realize how extremely politically biased OAN is.

[Otter]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Because the whole "Covid deaths are actually because of pneumonia" (which was caused by covid) argument is complete horseshit that's been debunked on this thread ad nauseam. That argument has been put forward as a political football, and that's the only reason it's ever brought up. It's nonsense to say that isn't political. OANN is just the icing on the cake.

When you going to put you money where your cock massger is and post those gay reps you claim I sent you?

Or do you need more lackeys from the poker board you fat loser?

[phisherman]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

If you're going to qualify links based on a presumed political agenda, the amount of links in this thread is going to shrink to nothing.

I totally agree. Just letting the OP of that link know. This also seemed like a rehash of a similar argument from about a month ago.

[Otter]

Originally Posted by Otter

When you going to put you money where your cock massger is and post those gay reps you claim I sent you?

Or do you need more lackeys from the poker board you fat loser?

This is where scuzzball whistles past the graveyard claiming he's an honest and nice guy.

[htismaqe]

[QUOTE=Fish;15286141]I care more about validity than source. I don't see any other respectable outlets pushing this misinformation any longer. Some other outlets did the same many months ago, yes. But once it was explained by experts how death certificates and comorbidities worked, the misrepresentation stopped. Misinformation should be labeled as so regardless of source. /[quote]

You already addressed it correctly then, didn't you? You refuted the information thoughtfully, point by point. There's nothing more to be said about it, unless you lack so much confidence in your refutation that you'd rather just ban the source outright, correct?

Originally Posted by Fish

That said, it takes about 2 grams of common sense to realize how extremely politically biased OAN is.

The same could be said of Fox News, Yahoo, Breitbart, ABC News, and many many others. Should we disallow links based on the originator of the information or should we allow misinformation to be posted so that it can be properly corrected?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Because the whole "Covid deaths are actually because of pneumonia" (which was caused by covid) argument is complete horseshit that's been debunked on this thread ad nauseam. That argument has been put forward as a political football, and that's the only reason it's ever brought up. It's nonsense to say that isn't political. OANN is just the icing on the cake.

Silencing dissension is inherently political. Real science welcomes skepticism and when warranted, crushes it.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

You already addressed it correctly then, didn't you? You refuted the information thoughtfully, point by point. There's nothing more to be said about it, unless you lack so much confidence in your refutation that you'd rather just ban the source outright, correct?



The same could be said of Fox News, Yahoo, Breitbart, ABC News, and many many others. Should we disallow links based on the originator of the information or should we allow misinformation to be posted so that it can be properly corrected?

I never said anything about banning the source. My point was made in my first post, my second post was responding to you quoting my post. You were asking me who gets to be arbitrator of sources. I again replied that I didn't care about the source.

I'm not calling for disallowing anything and I don't think we should. Not sure how that wasn't clear the last couple posts.

[O.city]

The whole with or from thing is just cover. It’s a nuanced situation and discussion medically and frankly without medical backgrounds it’s tough.

The human body is a super intricate machine.

I spent 8 years in school in the medical field and a lot of it is over my head. I know covid doesn’t effect teeth atleast to my knowledge.

Is there some bad actors in play? Absolutely. Have we missed some deaths? Absolutely.

Honestly, we’d be better off if we’d quit fighting about it and forget being wrong or right and just say “how can I help brother? What do you need?” And just deal with each other compassionately

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Silencing dissension is inherently political. Real science welcomes skepticism and when warranted, crushes it.

The whole "person with diabetes who died from covid actually died from diabetes" argument has been crushed. In this thread. Many many times. It's clearly nonsense on its face. Skepticism requires making an actual argument.

Certain posters just keep re-asserting the same talking points every few days - w/o making any new argument or attempt at a rebuttal of the stuff Fish and others have painstakingly explained over and over and over.

Death certificates usually list multiple causes. That's how they work. If you're in the hospital with covid, and pneumonia shows up on your death certificate along with covid, that does not mean that you're being unfairly counted in with covid deaths. It means pneumonia was your major complication from covid. To claim otherwise is ludicrous on its face and clearly just propaganda.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

The whole "person with diabetes who died from covid actually died from diabetes" argument has been crushed. In this thread. Many many times. It's clearly nonsense on its face. They just keep re-asserting the same talking points every few days w/o making any new argument or attempt at a rebuttal.

Then crush it again. It should be easy if it has been done before.

Or make it political and ask for them to be banned.

[suzzer99]

I did crush it again. And so did Fish.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Fish

I never said anything about banning the source. My point was made in my first post, my second post was responding to you quoting my post. You were asking me who gets to be arbitrator of sources. I again replied that I didn't care about the source.

I'm not calling for disallowing anything and I don't think we should. Not sure how that wasn't clear the last couple posts.

You responded to me directly, and quoted me quoting phisherman, who explicitly said the post was political based solely on the source site.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

I did crush it again. And so did Fish.

Then there's no issue anymore, right?

[suzzer99]

And when the exact same nonsense comes up tomorrow, and the next day and the next day? How is that not bad faith trolling at that point?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

And when the exact same nonsense comes up tomorrow, and the next day and the next day? How is that not bad faith trolling at that point?

Report it. That's the proper protocol.