***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.”

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

Because the federal government and he a lth officials think that is what needs to happen. Just like now and up to this point in time some states have been following others are doing what they think is right. It will be no different going forward.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[BigCatDaddy]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

They know what's best for you dammit! Just do it for 2 weeks to stop the spread and we will be through this.

[KC_Lee]

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy

They know what's best for you dammit! Just do it for 2 weeks to stop the spread and we will be through this.

We're all in this together!!

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy

They know what's best for you dammit! Just do it for 2 weeks to stop the spread and we will be through this.

Originally Posted by KC_Lee

We're all in this together!!

Nice to see you missed the point. I understand your bias and even agree with it overall. That does not change the fact that the Federal Government is going to leverage the states to follow their recommendations. They will also enact those kinds of mandates on Federal property and buildings. Those are the facts whether anyone likes it or not.

[MahomesMagic]

The efficacy data for the J&J vaccine look absolutely wonderful. No apparent reduction in efficacy against the B.1.351 variant common in SA (?!). Numbers are small, but if confirmed, this is arguably today's most significant piece of news, and it's a one shot vaccine ... https://t.co/LAaOMHf1y7

— Prof Francois Balloux (@BallouxFrancois) February 24, 2021

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

Because the federal government and health officials think that is what needs to happen. Just like now and up to this point in time some states have been following others are doing what they think is right. It will be no different going forward.

I mean, I understand if they're trying to preach that a vaccine doesn't turn the world into Mardi Gras. But everyone is sick of this idea that we're doing our part to get the vaccine and yet nothing will change. The best marketing for the vaccine is to tell us that at least some things will go back to normal. Sorry, but selling people hesitant to get the vaccine that the only motivation is to prevent death for a disease that won't kill a substantial amount of the audience is baffling.

[IA_Chiefs_fan]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The best marketing for the vaccine is to tell us that at least some things will go back to normal. Sorry, but selling people hesitant to get the vaccine that the only motivation is to prevent death for a disease that won't kill a substantial amount of the audience is baffling.

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!

[louie aguiar]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

The efficacy data for the J&J vaccine look absolutely wonderful. No apparent reduction in efficacy against the B.1.351 variant common in SA (?!). Numbers are small, but if confirmed, this is arguably today's most significant piece of news, and it's a one shot vaccine ... https://t.co/LAaOMHf1y7

— Prof Francois Balloux (@BallouxFrancois) February 24, 2021

Can someone that knows more about these vaccines than I do explain to me why I should get this vaccine instead of waiting for pfizer/moderna? 66% efficacy compared to 94/95% efficacy is quite the gap.

[Indian Chief]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

Can someone that knows more about these vaccines than I do explain to me why I should get this vaccine instead of waiting for pfizer/moderna? 66% efficacy compared to 94/95% efficacy is quite the gap.

At the time that Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were developed and tested, we were not aware of the variants (SA, UK, etc) and those vaccines were not tested against that. J&J has the distinction of running trials specifically with the SA variant in mind. In short, the previously released vaccines would likely not have the same efficacy if they had been in trials a few months later. So the gap isn't actually 66 to 95%.

[mr. tegu]

I think you will see about a 50% vaccination rate at best. Those who had the virus, most likely won’t get it. Rightfully so in my opinion. Regarding everyone else, I believe that the excitement and conversation about getting the virus reduces every day. The slow roll out is a problem in this regard. For large amounts of people who won’t even have access to it until April, May, and even June, they are going to look around and see cases and deaths being pretty minimal. By then the initial surge of momentum and excitement, combined with need, about getting the vaccine will be greatly reduced.

This seems especially likely to me because these will be the younger, healthier, and or low exposure group. If the message continues to be masks social distancing even with the vaccine, what will be their motivation? On top of that if we keep hearing about a need for boosters, which are basically a nonstarter in my view in that the vast majority won’t get them, people in those last eligible groups just aren’t going to commit to something like that in large numbers.

[chiefzilla1501]

Jnj is real good news. Prioritize for low income and remote areas. These are areas that will struggle most with storing and administering shots. Jnj solves both problems since its more easily stored and only needs one shot. Hopefully means increased capacity for everyone else to deliver pfizer/covid in areas where infrastructure is in place.

[louie aguiar]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Jnj is real good news. Prioritize for low income and remote areas. These are areas that will struggle most with storing and administering shots. Jnj solves both problems since its more easily stored and only needs one shot. Hopefully means increased capacity for everyone else to deliver pfizer/covid in areas where infrastructure is in place.

So, save the good stuff for the rich folk? Why should low income get the least effective vaccine? The govt is footing the bill anyway.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

So, save the good stuff for the rich folk? Why should low income get the least effective vaccine? The govt is footing the bill anyway.

He just said why:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

These are areas that will struggle most with storing and administering shots. Jnj solves both problems since its more easily stored and only needs one shot. Hopefully means increased capacity for everyone else to deliver pfizer/covid in areas where infrastructure is in place.

[louie aguiar]

Originally Posted by loochy

He just said why:

I get rural areas. Many poor people live in urban areas, though, where access to healthcare providers that have the storage isn't an issue.

[loochy]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

I get rural areas. Many poor people live in urban areas, though, where access to healthcare providers that have the storage isn't an issue.

It has to do with it being a single shot vs multi-dose. If you haven't noticed, low income folk tend to have other things on their mind...getting them a single dose would be significantly easier.