***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.”

[ghak99]

Originally Posted by Hog's Gone Fishin

I had a renter who works at a hospital tell me she has a sore throat and is sick and just put $1350 CASH in my ****ing mailbox.

What the hell!

Do you owe anyone you don't like money?

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

they are being generous that it happened in the last year.

Where the shift happened was the access to cheap big data, business intelligence and analytics. You just need a cheap licesense in the AWS/Azure clouds. Now more data points are being fed into software. I saw a system the other day that had 2000 data points mapped. Which means you can search for something that has those same 2000 characteristics.

This horse has left the barn. You can’t run, you can’t hide. You can’t even live off the grid in a cabin in the woods.

The good news is besides the intelligence branches, the government still has no clue on how to utilize this tech or the competent people to run the systems.

In the end we're just noise... aggregate data... another brick in the wall.

[Titty Meat]

......

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Hog's Gone Fishin

yeah, like I can get lysol.

I put on a glove and pulled it and dropped it in a coffe can and sprayed it with bleach and put a lid on it.

i'll let it sit for a few days .

After five minutes you'll be fine.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

In the end we're just noise... aggregate data... another brick in the wall.

We are the product.

[kgrund]

Seems a little unorthodox, but has any consideration been given in terms of our testing focus? It seems to only make sense to test really sick people when they are coming in because you want to know what they have and in most outbreaks the truly sick drive an outbreak. However, given rising evidence that the individuals that do not appear sick or have milder symptoms are driving this pandemic should our primary focus turn to them given our limited time and resources?

You could test the truly sick coming in for the other potential health issues that the sickness could be from. If they test negative on all of them, the assumption would be that they have it especially if they are exhibiting the classic symptoms. With the time and resources saved from diagnosing the truly sick, you could (1) test the ones would believe they have it, but are told to stay home and (2) test statistical samples of the population to determine the extent of the spread.

Certainly the numbers of positives from people showing up at the hospitals would not be dramatically different, but we would get a far greater understanding of the problem we are dealing with.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Jerm

Exactly, nothing is going to change.

Nothing will change barring like martial law....

okay so if nothing changed then why are 10 million people suddenly out of work, you can't go to see a movie or eat in a restaurant, you can't go to the gym, my kid can't go to school and there isn't a ****ing bottle of hand sanatizer in any grocery store in the country?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by kgrund

Seems a little unorthodox, but has any consideration been given in terms of our testing focus? It seems to only make sense to test really sick people when they are coming in because you want to know what they have and in most outbreaks the truly sick drive an outbreak. However, given rising evidence that the individuals that do not appear sick or have milder symptoms are driving this pandemic should our primary focus turn to them given our limited time and resources?

You could test the truly sick coming in for the other potential health issues that the sickness could be from. If they test negative on all of them, the assumption would be that they have it especially if they are exhibiting the classic symptoms. With the time and resources saved from diagnosing the truly sick, you could (1) test the ones would believe they have it, but are told to stay home and (2) test statistical samples of the population to determine the extent of the spread.

Certainly the numbers of positives from people showing up at the hospitals would not be dramatically different, but we would get a far greater understanding of the problem we are dealing with.

You'd need the capacity to test a large, random sample, and quite frankly, you need a test with much better sensitivity.

[petegz28]

JFC, 1,314 deaths today. 800 of them out of NY and NJ.

[kgrund]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

You'd need the capacity to test a large, random sample, and quite frankly, you need a test with much better sensitivity.

I agree with all of this. My question is more focused on who we choose to test. What information at this time is of greater benefit to us in fighting this pandemic?

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by petegz28

JFC, 1,314 deaths today. 800 of them out of NY and NJ.

Sad times we are in man.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by kgrund

I agree with all of this. My question is more focused on who we choose to test. What information at this time is of greater benefit to us in fighting this pandemic?

I think they're going about this the right way given limited resources. If they can flatten the curve, they can likely perform a large antibody test on a large, random sample that will have both the specificity and sensitivity we need. However, given that hospital occupancy is demonstrating/ near exponential growth, it is highly unlikely there was large community spread prior to late February.

[Titty Meat]

Teams with the Missouri National Guard have evaluated Hy-Vee Arena, the Independence Events Center, Bartle Hall & the Adam's Mark hotel as possible temporary care sites due to the coronavirus.




Shit is about to pop off

[MIAdragon]

Just got the call from my sister that she’s tested positive.

[POND_OF_RED]

Flew out of Bozeman Montana today and they have there army reserves testing anyone coming into the state now to put them under quarantine if they’re coming from certain states. Meanwhile Minneapolis Saint Paul still has a couple restaurants in the airport that people are sitting at the bar eating.

Also Delta made quite a few passengers sit right next to each other until the plane was fully boarded and they knew they’d have extra seats...plane wasn’t even 1/4 full. Very weird policy during these times some passengers were not too happy