***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.”

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Monticore

The vulnerable people now are the unvaccinated.

A person under 55 years old with no pre-existing health issues is not vulnerable.

But I guess it comes down to your appetite for risk.

1.4 deaths per 10000 for Covid now in the US vs 1.3 deaths per 10000 for flu.

If that scares you go get your shot. And your booster.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

A person under 55 years old with no pre-existing health issues is not vulnerable.

But I guess it comes down to your appetite for risk.

1.4 deaths per 10000 for Covid now in the US vs 1.3 deaths per 10000 for flu.

If that scares you go get your shot. And your booster.

Nothing to do with fear , in a pool of people the unvaccinated would be considered higher risk than the vaccinated , 40 year old unvaccinated is more vulnerable than a 60 year old vaccinated.

[ChiTown]

Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brother

There is absolutely zero reason for a fully vaccinated person to be forced to wear one. Also, if you haven't been vaccinated at this point,, that and the risk is on you.
No excuse. That's why. Not one damn logical reason.

That's where I'm at. As of May 1st, everyone in the US 16 and older is eligible to get the shot, correct?

Get your gawdman shot. By end of June, there shouldn't be a mask mandate ANYWHERE in the US. If you haven't been fully vaccinated by then, it's completely on you, and I'm no longer inclined to worry about people hesitant to get the shot.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

A person under 55 years old with no pre-existing health issues is not vulnerable.

But I guess it comes down to your appetite for risk.

1.4 deaths per 10000 for Covid now in the US vs 1.3 deaths per 10000 for flu.

If that scares you go get your shot. And your booster.

It's not just death. It's illness, transmitting, or being a vector for a mutation.

But at this point, do what you want. With the vaccines, your protected. So do whatevs.

[BigCatDaddy]

My wife wants to go to New York in the fall. Any weird restrictions there like needing a vaccination card or restricted travel?

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

It's not just death. It's illness, transmitting, or being a vector for a mutation.

But at this point, do what you want. With the vaccines, your protected. So do whatevs.

It's not just me. A lot of people are angry after a year of this nonsense where many have lost their jobs, their businesses, been unable to see loved ones dying from other illness and old age, as well as the loss of their children's educational opportunities.

I can see why some of these public health people (that actually made us poorer, sicker, and fatter as a nation) don't want to exit the stage but their time has expired.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Monticore

The vulnerable people now are the unvaccinated.

Not completely true.

Of course this is just one anecdote but it's the first person really close to me that actually had COVID and his story is crazy.

He'd been sick off and on for about a month. He was tested for COVID and was negative. When his symptoms failed to improve, he was tested AGAIN for COVID and it was negative.

Finally, his breathing became a problem and they admitted him to the hospital for observation. He AGAIN tested negative for COVID, so they gave him the vaccine, despite him being sick.

Of course, all 3 tests were wrong - he did have COVID and the shot promptly landed him in ICU in Des Moines after a nice ride on a life flight helicopter.

Again, this isn't to say people shouldn't get vaccinated. It's just to say that you can't make blanket generalizations like this.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Not completely true.

Of course this is just one anecdote but it's the first person really close to me that actually had COVID and his story is crazy.

He'd been sick off and on for about a month. He was tested for COVID and was negative. When his symptoms failed to improve, he was tested AGAIN for COVID and it was negative.

Finally, his breathing became a problem and they admitted him to the hospital for observation. He AGAIN tested negative for COVID, so they gave him the vaccine, despite him being sick.

Of course, all 3 tests were wrong - he did have COVID and the shot promptly landed him in ICU in Des Moines after a nice ride on a life flight helicopter.

Again, this isn't to say people shouldn't get vaccinated. It's just to say that you can't make blanket generalizations like this.

Just by medical definition they are, just like people who drive are higher risk of getting into car accidents even though some pedestrians do still get hit by cars.

Men still get breast cancer etc..

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Monticore

Just by medical definition they are, just like people who drive are higher risk of getting into car accidents even though some pedestrians do still get hit by cars.

Men still get breast cancer etc..

Do you believe a vaccinated 60 year old is safer than a non-vaccinated 10 year old from Covid?

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Do you believe a vaccinated 60 year old is safer than a non-vaccinated 10 year old from Covid?

Safer from getting the disease probably , disease severity no but 100k 10year olds vs 100k vaccinated 60 year olds , the gap In The amount severely sick might close , if the vaccinated 60 year olds get infected at a fraction of the rate.if 100 kids get infect for every 60 year old .
Il

[notorious]

States are beginning to scale down vax orders and some are outright stopping them.

Demand has plummeted.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/covid-dil...114958812.html

[Otter]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Do you believe a vaccinated 60 year old is safer than a non-vaccinated 10 year old from Covid?

You're going to have to provide more details on what you mean by "safer".

[O.city]

https://twitter.com/alecstapp/status...389377029?s=21

[TLO]

Originally Posted by O.city

https://twitter.com/alecstapp/status...389377029?s=21

So Sweeden shit the bed?

[HonestChieffan]

There may be some thought given to Health Insurance differentiation for those who choose to not take the vaccinations. There is no rational reason for the total cost of insurance to go up for the pool to cover the people who choose to run the risk.

I certainly understand some with reluctance but this is getting absurd.