***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.”

[Discuss Thrower]

A $1000 means tested lump sum ain't gonna do much long term.

Nearly 1 in 5 American households have already experienced a layoff or a reduction in work hours due to the coronavirus pandemic, a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll finds.https://t.co/TKySoTv6Fp

— NPR (@NPR) March 17, 2020

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

And to build on this just a little bit more.

I think there were some well meaning 'overestimates' at times as well.

If I'm looking to settle a case and I need $1,000 to do it, I'm not gonna come in asking for $1,000. I'm not gonna ask for $10,000 because I've overplayed my hand and blown everything out of the water.

But I'll ask for 2. I'll overstate the circumstances by a little to ensure that the situation is taken seriously. We all do it. It happens in football discussions all the time - remember the "ALEX SMITH IS MATT CASSEL 2.0!!!" days? Nobody really thought Alex Smith was Matt Cassel, but they said he was to demonstrate that he damn sure wasn't Patrick Mahomes. Sometimes that hand gets overplayed, sometimes it gets played just right.

But I think there were a lot of people who REALLY felt like this was being taken too lightly, and perhaps without cause. So they, consciously or subconsciously, played to the more dire consequences side of the ledger to push the responses as much as they could.

Just a theory...

With epidemiologist and virologist that's the way you're kind of trained. Prepare for the worst hope for the best kind of thing.

[PAChiefsGuy]

New York Virus to Peak in 45 Days, Taxing Hospitals, Cuomo Says

(Bloomberg) -- New York state will be in desperate need of hospital beds and ventilators soon, and may need more than 12 times the existing intensive-care capacity, Governor Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday.

The state is estimating the numbers of cases caused by the novel coronavirus outbreak will peak in 45 days, at which point it will need between 55,000 and 110,000 hospital beds, as well as 18,600 to 37,200 intensive-care unit beds, Cuomo told reporters in Albany.

The state currently has 53,000 hospital beds and 3,000 ICU beds available, he said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ne...tPi?li=BBnb7Kz

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by O.city

I called my ER doc surgeon buddy that I play golf with here in town and told him if they need any real doctors at the hospital to give me a call.

But on a serious note I did volunteer to help at the hospital if it gets swamped. I'm just a dentist so I don't wanna be doing anything real medical, maybe changing linens or something.

How are you rectal thermometer skills?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Monticore

How are you rectal thermometer skills?

My aim ain't too bad.

[Monticore]

Originally Posted by O.city

My aim ain't too bad.

You’re hired.

[Donger]

I'm starting to hate this ****ing bug.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

And if your mom gets shot in a robbery they won't let you on the perpetrator's jury.

You don't advocate policy positions from personal loss or hardship. You have to maintain your cool, understand all consequences and work from there.

And 'our healthcare system' is not national. It's local. So long as the spread continues to behave here as it's behaved everywhere, it won't be a national immediate outbreak. It will continue to be a series of localized outbreaks that will need to be dealt with on a localized basis. SF having its hand full right now does NOTHING to impact capacity in Columbia, MO. And when it gets here, it's not going to be hospital beds in SF that determine the outcomes in Columbia.

So effectuating an immediate national lockdown and putting the clamps on thousands of communities that have not been in any way impacted by it right now will immediately start the '**** this' clock and you'll be burning time, good will and buy-in for no reason in those communities. Then if/when it DOES get there, you have a populace of frayed, exhausted, fiscally and emotionally drained people who are simply done. They'll you'll still have your hospital collapse followed by a local populace that no longer has the buy-in or wherewithal to be as responsible as they'd have otherwise been.

This has to continue to be dealt with on a localized basis. These responses have to continue to be tailored. Surgery with a shotgun is the LAST thing we need.

Strategically target the social distancing/self-isolating measures to the high risk group.

When a cancer patient going through chemotherapy has a compromised immune system, the entire community they live in does not shutdown and social distance.

Instead the individual social distances/self-isolates and those who come in direct contact with them take the proper precautions (i.e. wearing a mask, gloves, washing hands, limiting touching, etc.)

There is no reason why that same approach can't be used in this situation.

The small minority of people who suffer complications from COVID-19 and require hospitalization/medical attention are not some random group... they can be easily identified through common characteristics (i.e. the elderly and people with underlying health conditions).

That group of people should self-isolate and social distance.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Unless something dramatically shifts to the bad in the next week, and considering the social distancing it shouldn't, we aren't going to see anything near all the crazy predictions. We haven't seen the super fast climb in deaths or new cases predicted just 10 days ago.

The whole idea of "millions" of deaths is based off 50% of the people getting it and 3% of them dying. We have already dropped down to 1.5% death rate on cases we know exist so its obviously lower if 80% of people show very little sign of illness even if they contract it.

I tend to agree and hopefully that is the case.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

With epidemiologist and virologist that's the way you're kind of trained. Prepare for the worst hope for the best kind of thing.

No doubt. And ultimately there's no question that those guys are the best single sources of information here. But they also come at this from one single perspective: how do you keep people from getting sick.

Ask virologists over and over again and that's what they're going to do - A) prepare for the worst and B) try to avoid ALL illness.

They won't try to act as policymakers, nor should they. But people will believe that they're espousing policy through numbers.

Expertise is invaluable but it also needs to stop at its own borders. Don't expand that expertise outside the scope of its training. Don't take it to represent all viewpoints either.

Ultimately it's critical to find as much information as you can from as many respected resources as you can. This isn't just virologists but also economists, statisticians and even in this case, sociologists and psychologists.

There's not a one-stop shop for the answers right now. Everyone needs to utilize some pretty advanced research/critical thinking skills right now if they want to remain as informed as possible.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by FAX

Interesting editorial by Fauci, Lane, and Redfield in the New England Journal of Medicine. Exerpt first. Link below.

Oh ... and before you guys start down-thumbing my ass into oblivion again, I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I am NOT advocating that everyone rush out and french kiss the first stranger or elderly person they see.

On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia, the currently reported case fatality rate is approximately 2%.4 In another article in the Journal, Guan et al.5 report mortality of 1.4% among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19; these patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity. If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.

Thought you would like to know. Stay smart and strong Planeteers.

FAX

They have been reading my posts. It would also suggest in my opinion that this won’t be quite the issue at all next winter because people will not be exposed all at once like now since it’s brand new. Once it’s just out there people will get it as they do now with every other cold or flu, which is generally spread out geographically and over time and it won’t put pressure on healthcare, which really seems to be one of main concerns right now.

[Hammock Parties]

[Discuss Thrower]

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation...-us-california

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by PAChiefsGuy

New York Virus to Peak in 45 Days, Taxing Hospitals, Cuomo Says

(Bloomberg) -- New York state will be in desperate need of hospital beds and ventilators soon, and may need more than 12 times the existing intensive-care capacity, Governor Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday.

The state is estimating the numbers of cases caused by the novel coronavirus outbreak will peak in 45 days, at which point it will need between 55,000 and 110,000 hospital beds, as well as 18,600 to 37,200 intensive-care unit beds, Cuomo told reporters in Albany.

The state currently has 53,000 hospital beds and 3,000 ICU beds available, he said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ne...tPi?li=BBnb7Kz

Which is why national measures aren't the way to go at the moment.

Focus your energies and your resources on bracing NY (and 2-3 other key hot spots). Our hospital beds in Columbia won't help 'em. The federal government needs to act as reserve troops here to work hard with NY state and local officials to prepare for their needs and allocate resources accordingly. Try to get them through this as best you can for the next 3-4 weeks and then re-allocate as necessary and able elsewhere.

Otherwise it begins a race for resources all across the country. It's toilet-paper hoarding on a federal funds scale.

Target your efforts and the areas most in need and let everyone else save their emotional and financial capital for the time (perhaps not far from now) when they'll need it.

[BryanBusby]

Originally Posted by ptlyon

Pros and cons of being in IT:

Pro: You most likely can work remotely

Con: You most likely can work remotely

Yes and no. You can work remotely but tough to do with no end users to support.