***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.”

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Granted, it has 26k posts, but this thread's twists and turns are kind of hilarious. Sure, let's venture in the realm of word choice and grammar for a while. Why not?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

Interesting. What extra information did you glean from the second sentence?

Perhaps I should have said more precise.

Are you going to make a point with your apparent comparison to what I wrote?

[TLO]

Originally Posted by banyon

Update:

More than 120 employees test positive for Covid-19 at Missouri pork processing plant
From CNN's Brad Parks

The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services said more than 120 employees have tested positive for Covid-19 at Triumph Foods pork processing plant in St. Joseph.

The announcement comes after the state health department partnered with local health officials to offer testing to more than 2,000 employees at the plant earlier this week.

“We appreciate the willingness from employees of Triumph Foods to be tested and the collaboration with local health care providers to help prevent further spread of COVID-19 in this community,” DHSS Director Dr. Randall Williams said in a statement. “Partnering with providers and local health departments to test people, both symptomatic and asymptomatic, is part of our “box-in” strategy with this virus moving forward.”
Employees with positive results are being notified by the city's Health Department and will be told to isolate.

At the request of the city's Health Department, the state is sending support staff to assist with contact tracing efforts and more testing is to be expected as close contacts of patients are notified.


https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/us-...-20/index.html

I wonder why they don't mention that the majority of the cases were of asymptomatic individuals?

[Demonpenz]

close errrr up

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

Perhaps I should have said more precise.

I have no idea whether you should have used "precise" there.

As far as you can tell, in what way is the first sentence less precise?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Granted, it has 26k posts, but this thread's twists and turns are kind of hilarious. Sure, let's venture in the realm of word choice and grammar for a while. Why not?

I was wondering whether or not a mod was going to chime in.

I was also wondering if a mod was going to chime in.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

I have no idea whether you should have used "precise" there.

As far as you can tell, in what way is the first sentence less precise?

You tell me. You enjoy implying words that don't exist.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Granted, it has 26k posts, but this thread's twists and turns are kind of hilarious. Sure, let's venture in the realm of word choice and grammar for a while. Why not?

Honestly, at first, I was just trying to troll Donger randomly. Now, I'm 100% into it, though. I realize literally nobody gives a **** about this and it's just polluting this thread. I am sorry, guys.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

Honestly, at first, I was just trying to troll Donger randomly. Now, I'm 100% into it, though. I realize literally nobody gives a **** about this and it's just polluting this thread. I am sorry, guys.

Extraneous "though." Noted and reported.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

You tell me. You enjoy implying words that don't exist.

Sure. In reality, both sentences mean the exact same thing, are equally precise, and correct.

The obvious difference to any objective observer is the use of the optional "then" in one sentence. The fact that it is naturally implied in the other sentence makes it optional. There is no magic to it. The same rule applies to the optional, implied "or not" in your original, poorly-crafted sentence.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

I was also wondering if a mod was going to chime in.

The choice to remain ignorant is wholly yours, Donger.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Is this a CoronaVirus thread or a ****ing English class?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

Sure. In reality, both sentences mean the exact same thing, are equally precise, and correct.

The obvious difference to any objective observer is the use of the optional "then" in one sentence. The fact that it is naturally implied in the other sentence makes it optional. There is no magic to it. The same rule applies to the optional, implied "or not" in your original, poorly-crafted sentence.

They aren't equal. The second sentence has an additional word in it.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Pants

The choice to remain ignorant is holey yours, Donger.

FYP

[Pants]

Originally Posted by Donger

They aren't equal. The second sentence has an additional word in it.

I never said they are equal or contain the same number of words. Read my post again.