***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.”

[Kidd Lex]

Originally Posted by DaFace

It's a bit of a long read, but I found this article to be really informative about the actual risks of various types of activities. It's worth the read if you have a few minutes.

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the...hem-avoid-them

It's "just a blog," but you can read the author's credentials at the top (immunologist), and it's cited the whole way through. It focuses on how many "transmission events" (outbreaks and other traced infections) have occurred under different circumstances, which I like a lot more than the theoretical stuff based on when virus particles can be found in the air.

A couple highlights from my perspective:

1. Successful virus transmission is a factor of exposure plus time. The gist is that, if it takes 1000 virus particles to become infected, that can be 100 breaths in an environment where you're taking in 10 at a time, or it could be taking a direct sneeze to the face where you take in thousands all at once. That means that the biggest issues are indoor environments without great ventilation.
2. "The main sources for infection are home, workplace, public transport, social gatherings, and restaurants. This accounts for 90% of all transmission events. In contrast, outbreaks spread from shopping appear to be responsible for a small percentage of traced infections. Importantly, of the countries performing contact tracing properly, only a single outbreak has been reported from an outdoor environment (less than 0.3% of traced infections)."

So in short, it seems like outdoor activities should be relatively safe. While it's technically possible you could become infected outdoors, it would take a prolonged period of time being exposed to someone's exhaled air. That said, sneezing, coughing, or 80k people yelling at the top of their lungs for 3 hours straight would all make it far more likely.

Retail is probably not terrible, though the distancing guidelines make sense to keep the concentrations of exhaled air to a minimum.

Offices just depend on the ventilation and layout. If you work in an open office, I'd certainly be lobbying to keep the number of people working remotely up as high as possible.

Restaurants? Ehh...let's just say I personally won't be going to any restaurants that don't have an open window I can sit at at least.

Awesome and useful share. Thank you!

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by petegz28

And I know this borders on political but I would say that these Governors and Mayors and City Councils and such that are ordering these lock downs have their pay checks suspended until the people that pay them are allowed to return to work.

If you're going to intentionally put people out of work then you need to join with them them. Take your ass to the unemployment line like the others have to do. It's really easy to tell someone else to sit at home without a job while you get your full pay check.

You understand most of those people staying at home are getting unemployment benefits right? And if a councilmember in most citites joined the other folks on unemployment they would actually make more money off unemployment right?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Monticore

It is hard to not contaminate your self or things , it is even hard for hospital workers who sometimes have helpers just for donning and doffing PPE.

This guy speaks the truth. When I test our production samples for sterility I basically hose down my sterile sleeves with IPA and re-spray my gloves every 2-3 minutes and every time my hands get within six inches of leaving the laminar flow area, and this is inside of a hood with HEPA filtration, unidirectional airflow, that gets disinfected with IPA before each process and sprayed with sporicide multiple times per week.

[Halfcan]

*

[cdcox]

In a normal situation with the masks being worn by the general public, the masks do more to keep you from spreading to others than they do to protect you from others. If you refuse to wear a mask, you're either don't know better or are disrespecting everyone around you. To simplify, people not wearing masks are either stupid or assholes.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by cdcox

In a normal situation with the masks being worn by the general public, the masks do more to keep you from spreading to others than they do to protect you from others. If you refuse to wear a mask, you're either don't know better or are disrespecting everyone around you. To simplify, people not wearing masks are either stupid or assholes.

If I'm not sneezing or coughing or shitting on everything, how would I be spreading it?

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

If I'm not sneezing or coughing or shitting on everything, how would I be spreading it?

The blog I posted earlier points out that even breathing can do it. Talking makes it worse. Yelling makes it worse.

It's nowhere near coughing or sneezing, mind you, and it would take a pretty prolonged exposure for it to matter. But in theory if you were standing in line behind someone for a while, it could happen. And if you had a bunch of people in an enclosed space, and a number of them were infected, not having masks could cause the concentration to be high enough to be a real issue.

Regardless, I would suggest based on my own observations these past weeks, that people do a shit poor job of keeping themselves from coughing and sneezing. Many of them still just cover their mouths with their hands. I'll take the masks, thanks.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

If I'm not sneezing or coughing or shitting on everything, how would I be spreading it?

1. Breathing

2. I don't believe you have known 30 minutes in advance before every cough or sneeze in your life. If you go into a public place, you could sneeze or you could cough. Once is enough.

[Bugeater]

Ok, so I'm not sneezing, coughing, yelling, or talking, and keeping my distance...why do I need to wear one?


I'm not necessarily against it...but I do feel like they could give a false sense of security and the effectiveness of them is being overplayed.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by cdcox

1. Breathing

2. I don't believe you have known 30 minutes in advance before every cough or sneeze in your life. If you go into a public place, you could sneeze or you could cough. Once is enough.

I'd literally have to cough in someone's face.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

Ok, so I'm not sneezing, coughing, yelling, or talking, and keeping my distance...why do I need to wear one?


I'm not necessarily against it...but I do feel like they could give a false sense of security and the effectiveness of them is being overplayed.

Would you prefer everyone wear them or no one wear them? "Only people who are showing symptoms" isn't really an option since a lot of this is spread by people who aren't showing symptoms.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

Ok, so I'm not sneezing, coughing, yelling, or talking, and keeping my distance...why do I need to wear one?


I'm not necessarily against it...but I do feel like they could give a false sense of security and the effectiveness of them is being overplayed.

I don't take a false sense of security from it at all. I wear one, but don't think it provides me much protection. I basically wear it to protect others I am around. I'm really careful about not touching my face though -- that's what I do for me.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by DaFace

Would you prefer everyone wear them or no one wear them? "Only people who are showing symptoms" isn't really an option since a lot of this is spread by people who aren't showing symptoms.

I'd prefer that it is left up to the individual to decide.



Let's be real, if it was as easy to transmit as Seedy is implying, we'd ALL have it by now.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

I'd literally have to cough in someone's face.

Wrong.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by cdcox

I don't take a false sense of security from it at all. I wear one, but don't think it provides me much protection. I basically wear it to protect others I am around. I'm really careful about not touching my face though -- that's what I do for me.

I respect your decision to do what you feel is necessary.

But not wearing one at all times doesn't make someone an asshole.