***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.”

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

My mother-in-law lives with us. I’m 100% certain she’s safer there than anywhere else. That’s just one household though.

Right. And not every one has that option particularly as their health deteriorates and they need more nursing care.

But even if an elderly person doesn't need assisted living, it isn't practical for most to isolate.

My mom still lives in her own house. Groceries could be delivered but she has a lot of doctor visits to treat the various things that come along with old age.

And they are not all to hospitals. For instance she has recently had several visits regarding a hearing aid. There is just no way to isolate the elderly from the rest of society while still taking care of their health.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

Right. And not every one has that option particularly as their health deteriorates and they need more nursing care.

But even if an elderly person doesn't need assisted living, it isn't practical for most to isolate.

My mom still lives in her own house. Groceries could be delivered but she has a lot of doctor visits to treat the various things that come along with old age.

And they are not all to hospitals. For instance she has recently had several visits regarding a hearing aid. There is just no way to isolate the elderly from the rest of society while still taking care of their health.

I never said it was convenient and it certainly requires a significant amount of sacrifice. It may not be practical for everyone but to pretend it’s impossible isn’t being honest. The problem is that a large majority of people simply don’t want to sacrifice anything. We live in a society where pursuit of pennies and pleasure trumps everything else. “Somebody else will eventually step in and pick up the tab so why should I put myself out?”

[TLO]

Numbers down from last Saturday.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by TLO

Numbers down from last Saturday.

Nice

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Monticore

I kept It as medical as possible , so I won’t elaborate.

It wasn’t political.

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by TLO

Numbers down from last Saturday.

No they aren't.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I never said it was convenient and it certainly requires a significant amount of sacrifice. It may not be practical for everyone but to pretend it’s impossible isn’t being honest. The problem is that a large majority of people simply don’t want to sacrifice anything. We live in a society where pursuit of pennies and pleasure trumps everything else. “Somebody else will eventually step in and pick up the tab so why should I put myself out?”

I perhaps should have broken up my post so it wasn't all directed at yours.

Yes, I agree that it would be better if people were less selfish. Taking care of vulnerable populations deserves more resources than it gets even in normal times.

And on a different note, if you want to provide health care to people that are 75+ in age, there is just no way to keep them isolated. Spending more money for instance wouldn't reduce the number of people that need to be seen by the elderly population like my mom. Even with reasonably good health there is the hearing aid specialist and the eye doctor and the skin doctor and the dentist and the physical therapist for shoulder surgery and another hip replacement and all the PT and therapy that involves and the list goes on.

Just a bunch of routine stuff for treating old age. You can't quarantine this population for three months+ and also take care of their health.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by TLO

Numbers down from last Saturday.

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

No they aren't.

Actually TLO is correct unless my math sucks. Let's check...

Last Saturday:

Cases = 58,535
Deaths = 1,123

This Saturday:

Cases = 54,199
Deaths = 976



I don't see how you can say he is not correct......

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

I perhaps should have broken up my post so it wasn't all directed at yours.

Yes, I agree that it would be better if people were less selfish. Taking care of vulnerable populations deserves more resources than it gets even in normal times.

And on a different note, if you want to provide health care to people that are 75+ in age, there is just no way to keep them isolated. Spending more money for instance wouldn't reduce the number of people that need to be seen by the elderly population like my mom. Even with reasonably good health there is the hearing aid specialist and the eye doctor and the skin doctor and the dentist and the physical therapist for shoulder surgery and another hip replacement and all the PT and therapy that involves and the list goes on.

Just a bunch of routine stuff for treating old age. You can't quarantine this population for three months+ and also take care of their health.

They didn’t implement lockdowns because of what it was doing to the elderly with low quality of life living in homes , they did it because of what it was doing to active 40-80 year old with co-morbidities which is a a large part of the population and that is hard to isolate like your mom , my dad for the reasons you mentioned.

A 40 year old spending 2 weeks on a vent is possibly going to reduce life expectancy and their quality of life more than a 89 year old in a home dying .

[dirk digler]

Duke did a study on masks which you find here.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...b-figures-data

The results are obviously N95 and surgical masks did the best, homemade cotton masks did very well and the worst are bandanas and fleece. Actually fleece was worse than not wearing a mask at all.

[Bwana]

Over 250K at Sturgis packed shoulder to shoulder and I haven't seen a mask yet in any of the videos. That place is going to be a rona factory.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Bwana

Over 250K at Sturgis packed shoulder to shoulder and I haven't seen a mask yet in any of the videos. That place is going to be a rona factory.

You get a Rona and you get a Rona and you get a Rona!!!!

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by TLO

So you're denying that what ethical skeptic is saying is rational?

ES never says anything clearly enough to really affirm or deny. First of all you have to guess at what exactly he means, which means someone else can always say "no, that's not what he means at all".

What do you think he's saying in that tweet?

[Kman34]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Duke did a study on masks which you find here.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...b-figures-data

The results are obviously N95 and surgical masks did the best, homemade cotton masks did very well and the worst are bandanas and fleece. Actually fleece was worse than not wearing a mask at all.

How long before somebody posts that stupid video of the guy saying they don’t work??

[jdubya]

Originally Posted by petegz28

You get a Rona and you get a Rona and you get a Rona!!!!

and we all will get a rona. Running away from this is like running away from the common cold....almost impossible. We will all eventually get a rona or a vaccine or both. Each time it mutates we hope it gets a little less virulent each time. We all just need to live with this and use precautions when we can.