***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.”

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by R Clark

Asshat just can’t help yourself

Funny, as far a ?onger goes, I found this question to be relatively harmless and most likely sincere.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I suppose #1 has slightly more weight with me but not much. I haven't honestly separated the two ideas that much.

So you're holding out for the J&J, which is not mRNA as I understand it?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by stevieray

what percentage of people have already survived the VIRUS?

Depends on age and such, but last I saw the IFR was around 0.65 ish?

This isn’t black and white live or die though.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Donger

So you're holding out for the J&J, which is not mRNA as I understand it?

From what I understand, the AZ/Oxford is a weakened virus, that's the one I've been watching.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by stevieray

what percentage of people have already survived the VIRUS?

I just can't get over how idiotic these kinds of arguments are. 2.7 million soldiers were sent to Vietnam, among whom around 58k were killed. That's only 2%, so why are we so upset about Vietnam?

Looking at the severity of incidents purely in terms of a percentage survival rate is ridiculous.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

From what I understand, the AZ/Oxford is a weakened virus, that's the one I've been watching.

Eh, not weakened. But it’s a more traditional delivery system

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Funny, as far a ?onger goes, I found this question to be relatively harmless and most likely sincere.

My skeptisim will depend on who my wife is eager to inject first me or the kids, if it's me i'll be worried.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

From what I understand, the AZ/Oxford is a weakened virus, that's the one I've been watching.

I think it's an adenovirus vaccine and J&J has said that it'll be not-for-profit.

Thanks for your answers.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Donger

I think it's an adenovirus vaccine and J&J has said that it'll be not-for-profit.

Thanks for your answers.

That's correct. I was misremembering. The AZ vaccine is an adenovirus vaccine.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I don't want to take the mRNA vaccine. I would rather take a more traditional vaccine, at least until the mRNA vaccines have been widely deployed outside of clinical trials.

It's interesting that we have preferences. I've never even heard of vaccine brands before this whole situation.

I was reading something about the AstraZeneca vaccine being 62% effective, and thinking I want to get the moderna or Pfizer vaccine at 95 percent. I keep hearing that the Pfizer has the strongest aftereffects, so my rankings would be moderna, then Pfizer, then AstraZeneca. But since the 2016 presidential Administration turned down ordering enough Pfizer vaccine, it looks like I will probably get the AstraZeneca given my likely spot in line. I'd rather get the most effective one.

[petegz28]

Apparently a lot of backlash coming out of LA over the closing of outdoor dining. I guess a Judge said it is nothing more than an abuse of power and some county health director person said the decision to close outdoor dining had nothing to do with science but to limit the places people can go thus forcing them to stay home.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

It's interesting that we have preferences. I've never even heard of vaccine brands before this whole situation.

I was reading something about the AstraZeneca vaccine being 62% effective, and thinking I want to get the moderna or Pfizer vaccine at 95 percent. I keep hearing that the Pfizer has the strongest aftereffects, so my rankings would be moderna, then Pfizer, then AstraZeneca. But since the 2016 presidential Administration turned down ordering enough Pfizer vaccine, it looks like I will probably get the AstraZeneca given my likely spot in line. I'd rather get the most effective one.

For me it's not brand, it has to do with the type/technology. The stuff I've read is that the AZ vaccine is about 75% but has pretty much zero in terms of side effects/risks because it's a well-used technology. I'm just not willing to be a "beta tester" for mRNA, even though "alpha testing" has been positive.

[TLO]

Russia is telling its people to limit their alcohol intake for 2 months following receiving the Sputnik vaccine.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by TLO

Russia is telling its people to limit their alcohol intake for 2 months following receiving the Sputnik vaccine.

Good luck with that!

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by TLO

Russia is telling its people to limit their alcohol intake for 2 months following receiving the Sputnik vaccine.

Inferior nanobot technology is my guess, stupid Russians.