***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.”

[Donger]

Originally Posted by petegz28

He also said this.....so just keep some objectivity

His statement on January 21 was accurate. He said we should take it seriously and that, right now, it wasn't a major threat to the US. It wasn't. We only had one case.

And yes, I know that certain people are being critical, and I know where. So, let's let this die here, and take it up in DC.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Deaths will be going up for at least a couple of weeks yet. We're not going to open up the economy with 1000 people a day dying from this. The average person just won't buy into thinking it is a good idea.

You have to qualify that. If we have 1,000 people a day dying in 2 states the rest of the country is going to become impatient being locked down. If no one is dying in states 1-48 in any significant amount then the average person is going to question WTF they are still being locked down.

Hopefully we won't see a spread that spiked anything. But at the moment the majority of deaths are coming from 2-3 states.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by O.city

I just think we need to do more to figure out when and how much the actual peak is.

Maybe we’re already there?

This is the exact same discussion that happened last weekend. And while it's great that NYC has some good data, it's not the entire country. You have to look at the entire clinical picture, not just the information you want to see.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I know this is an anxious time, but the worst thing you can be right now is impatient. If I have a patient getting antibiotics for sepsis, I don't stop the antibiotics whenever their CRP and lactate levels start to drop. All I'm going to do in that case is cause a rebound infection and make things worse, because the therapies I previously used may not as be as effective and the patient will clinically worsen.

We don't just need to get to the peak: we need to get past the peak and then down the slope on the other side so as to avoid another peak that is as bad or worse than the first.

This.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Donger

His statement on January 21 was accurate. He said we should take it seriously and that, right now, it wasn't a major threat to the US. It wasn't. We only had one case.

And yes, I know that certain people are being critical, and I know where. So, let's let this die here, and take it up in DC.

This isn't political. It obviously was a major threat thus our entire country being locked down now. My point is that he is human and the position he has doesn't make him right on everything by default.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by petegz28

This isn't political. It obviously was a major threat thus our entire country being locked down now. My point is that he is human and the position he has doesn't make him right on everything by default.

You can't say that while simultaneously arguing that people won't tolerate a lockdown that started two months later for much longer.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by petegz28

This isn't political. It obviously was a major threat thus our entire country being locked down now. My point is that he is human and the position he has doesn't make him right on everything by default.

He wasn't wrong, pete.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by petegz28

You have to qualify that. If we have 1,000 people a day dying in 2 states the rest of the country is going to become impatient being locked down. If no one is dying in states 1-48 in any significant amount then the average person is going to question WTF they are still being locked down.

Hopefully we won't see a spread that spiked anything. But at the moment the majority of deaths are coming from 2-3 states.

You continually try to localize this. There are a lot of states that new cases are growing at a rate of more than 10% a day, event though they have been on lockdown for a couple of weeks. It has never been confined to 2 or 3 states. There are places it is more active and less active. Most of the less active are becuase of measures that have been put it place not because a very infectous virus "isn't there".

[O.city]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

This is the exact same discussion that happened last weekend. And while it's great that NYC has some good data, it's not the entire country. You have to look at the entire clinical picture, not just the information you want to see.

Understandable

But there’s so much more at play here.

[jerryaldini]

Originally Posted by petegz28

You have to qualify that. If we have 1,000 people a day dying in 2 states the rest of the country is going to become impatient being locked down. If no one is dying in states 1-48 in any significant amount then the average person is going to question WTF they are still being locked down.

Hopefully we won't see a spread that spiked anything. But at the moment the majority of deaths are coming from 2-3 states.

Yeah most of the states have projected peaks late this month, with levels declining back to current levels by late May. Hopefully start incremental normalization by June in many places. But until rapid results testing is widely available everything I'm reading suggests policymakers won't appriove full normalization, and certainly not mass gatherings.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by O.city

Understandable

But there’s so much more at play here.

There is a lot at play. We don't have enough of a testing apparatus and our hospital resources are stretched to the thinnest of levels in the hot spots. We also know that we're not all crossing this minefield at the same time. Some areas just started locking down--other areas are still flouting a lot of restrictions.

This is a dynamic event with a multi-week lag and we have to understand our limitations before rushing headlong into a desired endgame.

We also have to appreciate that things change. It may take a few years before things are truly back to the way they were, and even then, it's going to have a profound impact on our personal and national psyche. I think we can all agree that we wish that wasn't the case, but it doesn't change the reality of what we need to do from here on.

This will change the way we live, and as much as we want to wash it away or ignore it, we can't, lest we end up in a far worse situation, both economically and in public health.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

You can't say that while simultaneously arguing that people won't tolerate a lockdown that started two months later for much longer.

Why not? Dude, Dr. Fauci is human. Just because he is a doctor doesn't making infallible.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

There is a lot at play. We don't have enough of a testing apparatus and our hospital resources are stretched to the thinnest of levels in the hot spots. We also know that we're not all crossing this minefield at the same time. Some areas just started locking down--other areas are still flouting a lot of restrictions.

This is a dynamic event with a multi-week lag and we have to understand our limitations before rushing headlong into a desired endgame.

We also have to appreciate that things change. It may take a few years before things are truly back to the way they were, and even then, it's going to have a profound impact on our personal and national psyche. I think we can all agree that we wish that wasn't the case, but it doesn't change the reality of what we need to do from here on.

This will change the way we live, and as much as we want to wash it away or ignore it, we can't, lest we end up in a far worse situation, both economically and in public health.

Life is definitely going to change. Life changed after WW2, it changed after 9/11 and it will change after this. How much or how little is anyone's guess we will have to wait and see.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cdcox

You continually try to localize this. There are a lot of states that new cases are growing at a rate of more than 10% a day, event though they have been on lockdown for a couple of weeks. It has never been confined to 2 or 3 states. There are places it is more active and less active. Most of the less active are becuase of measures that have been put it place not because a very infectous virus "isn't there".

No, I don't. I am pointing out the data is it is. The majority of deaths is indeed isolated to 2 states, 3 if you want to go further. No one said the virus "isn't there". You are reading what you want to read.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by Donger

He wasn't wrong, pete.

We'll agree to disagree.