***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 O.city

Because it shows what can happen with overshot and no precautions in place and when hospital capacity is stretched or when nursing homes get hit.

Nursing homes are getting swamped here in Mo and with as much community spread as we have, I don't think you can do much to protect them.

I would favor a strategy that protects nursing homes without killing people under 70 years old who according to Ioannidis have a .05 IFR globally.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Donger

THREAD: You may have seen false claims that Imperial COVID-19 "modelling envisaged Sweden paying a heavy price for its rejection of lockdown, with 40,000 Covid deaths by 1 May and almost 100,000 by June". Our researchers made no such prediction

— Imperial College (@imperialcollege) May 6, 2020

Yup, they didn't have to. Their crappy model wasn't a black box afterall.


Matt Ridley
@mattwridley
·
Jun 3
Uppsala University took the Imperial College model (or one of them) and adapted it to Sweden, and forecasted 90,000 deaths in Sweden by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if there was.

In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden.

'Uppsala University took the Imperial College model – or one of them – and adapted it to Sweden and forecasted deaths in Sweden of over 90,000 by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if a full lockdown was inforced. In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden until the end of May. This does seem to be a huge discrepancy and suggests there was something wrong with the model...'
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...be-replicated-

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

That was my point. Who cares about IFR in a one small area? The question is what is the best estimate of ifr globally and at a national level.

The Covid Doomsday people I see on Twitter are still stuck on failed models from 8 months ago.

This study was about seroprevalence not IFR. Also NYC was the epicenter of covid here in the US.

Of note, the seroprevalence in the RC group (as well as the UC group in the end of May, post peak) falls significantly below the threshold for potential community immunity, which has been estimated by one study to require at least a seropositivity rate of 67% for SARS-CoV-2.4Based on the population of NYC (8.4 million), we estimate that by the week ending May 24, approximately 1,7 million individuals had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Taking into account the cumulative deaths in the city by May 19 (16,674), this suggests a preliminary IFR of 0.97% (with the assumption that both seroconversion and death occur with similar delays). This is in stark contrast to the IFR of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic which was estimated to be 0.01%-0.001%.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

This study was about seroprevalence not IFR. Also NYC was the epicenter of covid here in the US.

Also NYC was the epicenter of covid

I live in NY. I get to hear every day how we are so blessed.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

I would favor a strategy that protects nursing homes without killing people under 70 years old who according to Ioannidis have a .05 IFR globally.

We can keep that IFR there when every one can get treatment and you can protect the people who will have major problems.

The issue is you can't really protect that many people. There's millions of people who are high risk. Nursing homes, elderly who live in multigenrational homes, etc.

The whole "protect those at risk" thing sounds great on paper. It's not feasible when there is this much spread. It will get into those areas.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Yup, they didn't have to. Their crappy model wasn't a black box afterall.


Matt Ridley
@mattwridley
·
Jun 3
Uppsala University took the Imperial College model (or one of them) and adapted it to Sweden, and forecasted 90,000 deaths in Sweden by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if there was.

In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden.

'Uppsala University took the Imperial College model – or one of them – and adapted it to Sweden and forecasted deaths in Sweden of over 90,000 by the end of May if there was no lockdown and 40,000 if a full lockdown was inforced. In fact, there have only been 4,350 deaths in Sweden until the end of May. This does seem to be a huge discrepancy and suggests there was something wrong with the model...'
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...be-replicated-

You realize that you just proved yourself wrong, right?

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Donger

You realize that you just proved yourself wrong, right?

Yay, now I just remembered having this exact conversation with you months ago and you are still doing the same crap.

Hope you get a copy of Neil "Millions of Dead" Ferguson when it comes out to stores.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Yay, now I just remembered having this exact conversation with you months ago and you are still doing the same crap.

Hope you get a copy of Neil "Millions of Dead" Ferguson when it comes out to stores.

Correcting disinformation isn't crap.

[O.city]

COVID has one goal. To spread. Here are the repercussions of ONE source of #COVID19 at an indoor sports practice.

60 people (still rising) tested positive over 18 days.

170+ people needed to self-isolate and 7 outbreaks were declared.

Our actions matter. Please be #COVIDWise pic.twitter.com/cTFtzCQASD

— Ottawa Public Health (@ottawahealth) November 2, 2020

Interesting example of contract tracing.

[Discuss Thrower]

"We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson et al. Individual-based models are increasingly used to model epidemic spread with explicit representation of demographic and spatial factors such as population distribution, workplace data, school data, and mobility...

"This individual-based modelling project predicts that with the current mitigation approach approximately 96,000 deaths (95% CI 52,000 to 183,000) can be expected before 1 July, 2020. At the peak period (early May), the need for ICU beds will be at least 40-fold higher than the pre-pandemic ICU-bed capacity, not considering ICU admissions for other conditions.

"Current policies reduce this number by approximately 15%, [81,000 deaths] while even more aggressive social distancing measures, such as adding household isolation or mandated social distancing can reduce this number by more than 50% [48,000].

[O.city]

Bahrain allows Sinopharm COVID-19 vaccine candidate use in frontline workers.

If truly effective, a live attenuated vaccine of this kind could well provide long-term immunity against the virus. https://t.co/NCXjw2dIbL

— Nicholas A. Christakis (@NAChristakis) November 3, 2020

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

"We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson et al. Individual-based models are increasingly used to model epidemic spread with explicit representation of demographic and spatial factors such as population distribution, workplace data, school data, and mobility...

"This individual-based modelling project predicts that with the current mitigation approach approximately 96,000 deaths (95% CI 52,000 to 183,000) can be expected before 1 July, 2020. At the peak period (early May), the need for ICU beds will be at least 40-fold higher than the pre-pandemic ICU-bed capacity, not considering ICU admissions for other conditions.

"Current policies reduce this number by approximately 15%, [81,000 deaths] while even more aggressive social distancing measures, such as adding household isolation or mandated social distancing can reduce this number by more than 50% [48,000].

Why did you post this?

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by Donger

Correcting disinformation isn't crap.

Have fun with that.

I am reminded of the people who sold the War On Terrorism and the War on Drugs. Those great wasted efforts still have loyal cheerleaders, no matter the proof that it was all for nothing.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Have fun with that.

I am reminded of the people who sold the War On Terrorism and the War on Drugs. Those great wasted efforts still have loyal cheerleaders, no matter the proof that it was all for nothing.

Your colors are showing again.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

We can keep that IFR there when every one can get treatment and you can protect the people who will have major problems.

The issue is you can't really protect that many people. There's millions of people who are high risk. Nursing homes, elderly who live in multigenrational homes, etc.

The whole "protect those at risk" thing sounds great on paper. It's not feasible when there is this much spread. It will get into those areas.

The NY state strategy of "protect" everyone has no yielded better results than Sweden, far from it.

We only have limited resources. It doesn't matter how hard you lock down. None of these NPI's can stop the virus. At best a small delay.