***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.”

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

She’s in hospitality sales. So a downturn no doubt but she’s been begrudgingly employed all of 9 months after a voluntary 5 year hiatus that nearly bankrupted them.

I do think it’s a forecasted HR nightmare, and potential FMLA type legislation hotspot we’re facing when companies open up and require people to come back in. My wife’s office in Chicago, which closed after 2 positive tests in March, has notified employees that they plan to reopen 5/4. She can’t wait but others are planning to refuse. We’re talking professionals. Going to be a shitshow trying to get people back in after the taste of working from home.

FMLA, for extended leave during this, will likely have your employer realizing that they could probably manage without your job being full-time and will just delegate your previous duties to someone else. Wouldn't be my first choice.

[KCUnited]

Originally Posted by lewdog

FMLA, for extended leave during this, will likely have your employer realizing that they could probably manage without your job being full-time and will just delegate your previous duties to someone else. Wouldn't be my first choice.

I’m envisioning something new born from the gazillion new lawsuits that will surely be filed.

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

I’m envisioning something new born from the gazillion new lawsuits that will surely be filed.

AZ is a right-to-work state. Always make yourself valuable. They can fire you for anything here and a lawsuit holding up is very rare.

But yes, can see this happening in many states and for many companies.

[eDave]

Originally Posted by lewdog

AZ is a right-to-work state. Always make yourself valuable. They can fire you for anything here and a lawsuit holding up is very rare.

But yes, can see this happening in many states and for many companies.

And if you do get unemployment, it's $240/week. It's rediculous. KANSAS pays $488. KANSAS!

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by eDave

And if you do get unemployment, it's $240/week. It's rediculous. KANSAS pays $488. KANSAS!

Dang, that is a pretty crazy difference! Didn't know that.

[Titty Meat]

Deaths going down in MO. Of course the protesters tomorrow will try and change that.

[eDave]

Originally Posted by Titty Meat

Deaths going down in MO. Of course the protesters tomorrow will try and change that.

They have a right to do that. One which you fought in the war to secure. Shut up.

[Kiimo]

I have the right to shoot myself in the dick

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by eDave

They have a right to do that. One which you fought in the war to secure. Shut up.

And I have the right to pray for their deaths.

Separation of church and state, am I right?!?!?!?

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by lewdog

AZ is a right-to-work state. Always make yourself valuable. They can fire you for anything here and a lawsuit holding up is very rare.

But yes, can see this happening in many states and for many companies.

Right to work only means you dont have to pay union dues if you are working for a unionized company but arent actually in the union yourself.

[Sure-Oz]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

Could you post a link?
Id like to purchase some.
Thanks man.

When I ordered a week ago it was a few dollars cheaper. Still waiting on them but reviews seek solid. You can search within Etsy there are so many different dealers..

https://www.etsy.com/shop/LittleOnes...aid=196c86bb1b

[eDave]

Originally Posted by lewdog

And I have the right to pray for their deaths.

Separation of church and state, am I right?!?!?!?

For sure. Stop downthumbing me, dick.

[eDave]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Right to work only means you dont have to pay union dues if you are working for a unionized company but arent actually in the union yourself.

It means a lot more than that.

[lewdog]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Right to work only means you dont have to pay union dues if you are working for a unionized company but arent actually in the union yourself.

Sure but that's not totally it.

In Arizona, as in other states, employees work at will. This means an employee can be fired at any time and for any reason, or for no reason at all, as long as the reason for the firing is not illegal. Arizona law prohibits discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, genetic information, and HIV/AIDS. In Arizona, employers must comply with these laws if they have at least 15 employees.

You don't have the rights, ability or likely beneficial outcome to fight most terminations here, like you would say in the state of New York.

[Chief Roundup]

How do those of you that live in Kansas feel about being the state that has done the least amount of testing per capita?