***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]

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...-spread-2020-3

It will be harder to get hard liquor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in the wake of the spread of the novel coronavirus: The state stores that have a monopoly on retail liquor sales are going to close shop indefinitely on Tuesday night.

I have no idea what the laws are in PA. Are they like UT where you can only get booze from state stores?

[SuperBowl4]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

Pennsylvania... the entire state... has ordered the closure of all liquor stores indefinitely.

On Saint Patrick's day Eve??

[stumppy]

Originally Posted by Donger

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...-spread-2020-3

It will be harder to get hard liquor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in the wake of the spread of the novel coronavirus: The state stores that have a monopoly on retail liquor sales are going to close shop indefinitely on Tuesday night.

I have no idea what the laws are in PA. Are they like UT where you can only get booze from state stores?

35 years ago you had to buy hard stuff from a state ran store.

[Dartgod]

Originally Posted by Donger

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...-spread-2020-3

It will be harder to get hard liquor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in the wake of the spread of the novel coronavirus: The state stores that have a monopoly on retail liquor sales are going to close shop indefinitely on Tuesday night.

I have no idea what the laws are in PA. Are they like UT where you can only get booze from state stores?

I'm not sure about PA, but NH has the same state run stores.

[Shiver Me Timbers]

Originally Posted by stumppy

35 years ago you had to buy hard stuff from a state ran store.

Oh the good ol' days.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by Donger

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...-spread-2020-3

It will be harder to get hard liquor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in the wake of the spread of the novel coronavirus: The state stores that have a monopoly on retail liquor sales are going to close shop indefinitely on Tuesday night.

I have no idea what the laws are in PA. Are they like UT where you can only get booze from state stores?

Hard liquor yeah only state stores.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

Hard liquor yeah only state stores.

why did a “state run” liquor store even ever get started?

[Shiver Me Timbers]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

why did a “state run” liquor store even ever get started?

$$$
$$$$$
$$¢$$$

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

why did a “state run” liquor store even ever get started?

Why is the state running the Marijuana dispensaries?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

Why is the state running the Marijuana dispensaries?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

the state also owns legal pot?

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

just shit in the shower and waffle stomp lmao

Or as it's known in Germany - showering.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

the state also owns legal pot?

They own 2 in Arkansas. There are others that are owned by individuals.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Donger

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...-spread-2020-3

It will be harder to get hard liquor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in the wake of the spread of the novel coronavirus: The state stores that have a monopoly on retail liquor sales are going to close shop indefinitely on Tuesday night.

I have no idea what the laws are in PA. Are they like UT where you can only get booze from state stores?

Aren't people going to die from withdrawal?

[suzzer99]

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/09/...covery-begins/

The researchers found very high levels of virus emitted from the throat of patients from the earliest point in their illness —when people are generally still going about their daily routines. Viral shedding dropped after day 5 in all but two of the patients, who had more serious illness. The two, who developed early signs of pneumonia, continued to shed high levels of virus from the throat until about day 10 or 11.

This seems like a strong argument for the mask theory.

I feel like they're still running the playbook from SARS:

This pattern of virus shedding is a marked departure from what was seen with the SARS coronavirus, which ignited an outbreak in 2002-2003. With that disease, peak shedding of virus occurred later, when the virus had moved into the deep lungs.

What if all that stuff about droplets and washing your hands is wrong for Covid-19 and it's really airborne from people with no symptoms?

Also from a guy I know in Japan:

Wearing masks during flu season and allergy season has long been a thing here. During a typical non-corona winter I’d estimate that around half of commuters wear masks on trains, and maybe 30% of all people you see walking around town.

When I first came here I eschewed the practice, but I’ve since gotten fully on board. As a result I’ve gotten sick less and my pollen allergies have been less severe.

I personally don’t buy that masks are ineffective against the virus. I can’t help but believe that when both parties are wearing one, there is less chance of transmission than if neither party did.

Needless to day, right now just about everyone in Japan is wearing a mask, although they are in short supply right now.

[suzzer99]

https://www.worldometers.info/corona...country/italy/



Here's some legit potential good news. Italy's new cases may have peaked.

It's hard to draw conclusions about when the peak happened from when they locked down because they locked down different things on different days. But if this holds up and isn't just a hitch, I'd guess two weeks from lockdown seems like a super rough guess for when you can expect to see a peak in new cases.