***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.”

[O.city]

It’s important to have this all down guys but

Antibodies don’t “wear off”. Neutralizing antibodies may wane but you’ve got memory B cells to ramp back up production. I really wouldn’t be overly concerned with it.

Then you’ve got cd8 and cd4 T cells and all that jazz that I knew at one time but am way to lazy to look up again.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by TLO

Our local hospital chain today announced they are offering free antibody testing for anyone who wants it. I have so many questions about the antibody test. Are they at a point where they can measure T cells and B cells?

Measuring T cells is a real bitch iirc. It can be done but honestly I have no recollection of how

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by O.city

Measuring T cells is a real bitch iirc. It can be done but honestly I have no recollection of how

I don't think there is a test for that right now. And some people are saying that for everyone that has antibodies, 3 people could have T-Cell resistance without antibodies.


Alex Berenson
@AlexBerenson

Florida again: People over 85 (not 75, 85) make up 1 in 3 of #COVID deaths statewide - 5x as many deaths as everyone under 55.

Put another way: if you are over 85, you have a 1 in 300 chance of dying of #COVID in Florida in the last five months.

Under 55? 1 in 33,000.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by TLO

I understand that the antibodies wear off, but that's why I ask about the B and T cells. Those in theory would be the protection from being reinfected. (I think I'm understanding that correctly)

My understanding is that the serology labs can produce some false positives, but negatives are reliable.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

Not sure why you went there with the contact tracing. This is about people that were exposed. I am on my phone so I can't do like you did but when I get home I will send a link to the article on that website that I am referencing.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

You only quarantine "close contacts", not people who had some general exposure to someone. Non close contacts are not actually considered exposures by the CDC or obviously Arkansas.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Eleazar

My understanding is that the serology labs can produce some false positives, but negatives are reliable.

Yes serology labs can produce false positives and very rarely produce a false negative and PCR testing can produce false negatives and very rarely produce false positives.

[Donger]

[Demonpenz]

is Hamas dead?

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

You only quarantine "close contacts", not people who had some general exposure to someone. Non close contacts are not actually considered exposures by the CDC or obviously Arkansas.

https://www.healthy.arkansas.gov/ima...vid_notice.pdf

ADH requires a person exposed to COVID-19 to complete a 14-day quarantine period, even though they may have a negative test result during the quarantine period.Quarantine of persons known to be exposed to someone with COVID-19 is a key strategy to stopping the spread of the illness.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...uarantine.html

Quarantine is used to keep someone who might have been exposed to COVID-19 away from others. Quarantine helps prevent spread of disease that can occur before a person knows they are sick or if they are infected with the virus without feeling symptoms. People in quarantine should stay home, separate themselves from others, monitor their health, and follow directions from their state or local health department.

[KCUnited]

Seems the nuance is in the definition of exposure which by cdc guidelines in <6' for >15 minutes.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...endations.html

** Data to inform the definition of close contact are limited. Factors to consider when defining close contact include proximity, the duration of exposure (e.g., longer exposure time likely increases exposure risk), and whether the exposure was to a person with symptoms (e.g., coughing likely increases exposure risk). While research indicates cloth face coverings may help those who are infected from spreading the infection, there is less information regarding whether cloth face coverings offer any protection for a contact exposed to a symptomatic or asymptomatic patient. Therefore, the determination of close contact should be made irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a cloth face covering. Because the general public has not received training on proper selection and use of respiratory PPE, it cannot be certain whether respiratory PPE worn during contact with an individual with COVID-19 infection protected them from exposure. Therefore, as a conservative approach, the determination of close contact should generally be made irrespective of whether the contact was wearing respiratory PPE, which is recommended for health care personnel and other trained users, or a cloth face covering recommended for the general public.

***Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of time that constitutes a prolonged exposure. Recommendations vary on the length of time of exposure, but 15 minutes of close exposure can be used as an operational definition. Brief interactions are less likely to result in transmission; however, symptoms and the type of interaction (e.g., did the infected person cough directly into the face of the exposed individual) remain important.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Seems the nuance is in the definition of exposure which by cdc guidelines in <6' for >15 minutes.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...endations.html

** Data to inform the definition of close contact are limited. Factors to consider when defining close contact include proximity, the duration of exposure (e.g., longer exposure time likely increases exposure risk), and whether the exposure was to a person with symptoms (e.g., coughing likely increases exposure risk). While research indicates cloth face coverings may help those who are infected from spreading the infection, there is less information regarding whether cloth face coverings offer any protection for a contact exposed to a symptomatic or asymptomatic patient. Therefore, the determination of close contact should be made irrespective of whether the person with COVID-19 or the contact was wearing a cloth face covering. Because the general public has not received training on proper selection and use of respiratory PPE, it cannot be certain whether respiratory PPE worn during contact with an individual with COVID-19 infection protected them from exposure. Therefore, as a conservative approach, the determination of close contact should generally be made irrespective of whether the contact was wearing respiratory PPE, which is recommended for health care personnel and other trained users, or a cloth face covering recommended for the general public.

***Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of time that constitutes a prolonged exposure. Recommendations vary on the length of time of exposure, but 15 minutes of close exposure can be used as an operational definition. Brief interactions are less likely to result in transmission; however, symptoms and the type of interaction (e.g., did the infected person cough directly into the face of the exposed individual) remain important.

What about the micro droplets that stay in the air for hours?
What about the fact that this very piece of information states that their dats is insufficient?
What about since they did this "update" and changed those criteria cases have ballooned?

[Chitownchiefsfan]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

I don't think there is a test for that right now. And some people are saying that for everyone that has antibodies, 3 people could have T-Cell resistance without antibodies.


Alex Berenson
@AlexBerenson

Florida again: People over 85 (not 75, 85) make up 1 in 3 of #COVID deaths statewide - 5x as many deaths as everyone under 55.

Put another way: if you are over 85, you have a 1 in 300 chance of dying of #COVID in Florida in the last five months.

Under 55? 1 in 33,000.

Heres what i dong get. I was looking up a baseline for this and dying in a car crash is about 1 in 103. But the number of deaths in Florida in 2017 was 3,116. Currently there have been 5,933 deaths in Florida.

Since there are such greater odds to die in car crashes why are there more total deaths with covid?

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Chitownchiefsfan

Heres what i dong get. I was looking up a baseline for this and dying in a car crash is about 1 in 103. But the number of deaths in Florida in 2017 was 3,116. Currently there have been 5,933 deaths in Florida.



Since there are such greater odds to die in car crashes why are there more total deaths with covid?

I'm assuming that your 1 in 103 stat is among people who are in crashes. There's no way it would be that high among the general population.

[TLO]

Originally Posted by O.city

So the new cdc study saying you’re only infectious about 5 days after showing symptoms. Did I read that right?

Do you have a link to this? I browsed around a bit and didn't see anything.

[TLO]

Originally Posted by lewdog

It could let you Know if you’ve recent had the virus and either didn’t know it, or produced a false negative on a swab test. I still think it’s good to do if it’s free.

I'm going to sign up. I expect I'll be negative, but you never know.