***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.”

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Donger

I'm missing your point.

It’s tiny.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

Because you are a ****ING moron.

Well, I hope his point with that floorplan is to show that they aren't at 107% capacity.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Donger

I'm missing your point.

His point is that 80% vs 107% is the approximate difference between 6 vs 7 people.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

It’s tiny.

BuT oMg HoUsToN HoSpItAls ArE aT 107%!!!!

Fear mongering piece of shit.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

It’s tiny.

And?

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

I don't know. You asked about present capacity to normal.

I pointed out that I doubt normal capacity is 107% and if you think it is. You are now dancing around not answering that question.

Think next time before you chime in, okay?

https://abc13.com/houston-icu-capaci...pital/6201846/

AND?

The ICU at Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital in northeast Houston was at 100 percent capacity Thursday morning, according to system officials.

Ben Taub hospital was at 90 percent capacity Thursday, which means there is at risk of running out of beds in its ICU.

Prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, both facilities reported a high capacity in ICUs.

Harris Health Systems CEO Esmaeil Porsa said there are about 51 COVID-19 patients across the Harris Health System hospitals and administrators have been watching the virus cases steadily increase.

Both LBJ and Ben Taub are on different levels of diversions, meaning some patients are being taken to other hospitals.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

It’s tiny.

So running the math after looking at the floor plan, they have 15 in a 14 bed ICU.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

https://abc13.com/houston-icu-capaci...pital/6201846/

AND?

Harris Health Systems CEO Esmaeil Porsa said there are about 51 COVID-19 patients across the Harris Health System hospitals and administrators have been watching the virus cases steadily increase.

Both LBJ and Ben Taub are on different levels of diversions, meaning some patients are being taken to other hospitals.

Great. I hope that they move patients to where there isn't 107% ICU capacity.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

So running the math after looking at the floor plan, they have 15 in a 14 bed ICU.

oMg 107%

/Donger's Dipshit argument

[Donger]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

oMg 107%

/Donger's Dipshit argument

It's not an argument. It's data and math. Remember what I said about you and those? You're proving me correct.

Now, let's stop cluttering the thread with your agenda, please.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

oMg 107%

/Donger's Dipshit argument

It’s a crisis of epic proportions.

[Pants]

Are there any other countries in the world currently fighting this pandemic where it's so politicized?

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

I'm just saying, saying LBJ is at 107% when they probably have a max of 20 ICU beds is just misleading.

Houston as a city has 1,600 ICU beds and over 15,000 LICENSED beds. LBJ makes up 200-ish of those 15,000.

Saying they are 107% of capacity is misleading and bullshit. (Fear Mongering) Especially when you consider the locations of these hospitals and their usual occupancy.

Sure, I agree that a headline of "Houston area hospital is at 107%, shut shit down!!" would be very misleading in that case, especially if that's like 1 bed.... but, I was pointing out there's a lot of gray area between that end of the spectrum and completely disregarding it, especially since there are also non-Covid ramifications of having Covid patients occupying beds that are typically in use anyway (again, if it's one bed...).

Again, nothing I can think of sounds hair-on-fire shut it all down level of urgency right now, but within any fear mongering headline, there can also be valid concerns from the healthcare professionals in that particular hospital and others.... and with exponential math, things can change quickly.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Sure, I agree that a headline of "Houston area hospital is at 107%, shut shit down!!" would be very misleading in that case, especially if that's like 1 bed.... but, I was pointing out there's a lot of gray area between that end of the spectrum and completely disregarding it, especially since there are also non-Covid ramifications of having Covid patients occupying beds that are typically in use anyway (again, if it's one bed...).

Again, nothing I can think of sounds hair-on-fire shut it all down level of urgency right now, but within any fear mongering headline, there can also be valid concerns from the healthcare professionals in that particular hospital and others.... and with exponential math, things can change quickly.

On that note, for whatever reason, this set things off, and it isn't unreasonable at all:

In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott warned that "tougher actions" may be imposed if the numbers there continue to spike, but he stressed that closing down the state again "will always be the last option."

"Covid-19 is now spreading at an unacceptable rate in Texas, and it must be corralled," Abbott said Monday. Houston’s Health Department said Harris County hospitals have a 177% increase in Covid-19 positive patients since May 31.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Donger

On that note, for whatever reason, this set things off, and it isn't unreasonable at all:

In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott warned that "tougher actions" may be imposed if the numbers there continue to spike, but he stressed that closing down the state again "will always be the last option."

"Covid-19 is now spreading at an unacceptable rate in Texas, and it must be corralled," Abbott said Monday. Houston’s Health Department said Harris County hospitals have a 177% increase in Covid-19 positive patients since May 31.

60,000 people marching for weeks probably was going to have this effect. I'm sorry people protested.

Shame