CDC: Risk of catching the Wuhan flu from surfaces not as high as previously thought

6,122 Views | 44 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by KidDoc
Jock 07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.foxnews.com/health/cdc-now-says-coronavirus-does-not-spread-easily-via-contaminated-surfaces
AggieAuditor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nope. It lives on my amazon packages for either 3 hours or maybe 7 days.
Squadron7
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieAuditor said:

Nope. It lives on my amazon packages for either 3 hours or maybe 7 days.

Or two weeks.
Aggie95
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
you must take individual packages and wipe them down...sit them outside for 2 days in the sun.

I fully expect ANOTHER CDC article in July stating: surfaces found to possibly enhance COVID-19 lethality.
MemorialTXAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Shocking to find out there was never a reason to bleach your baby spinach.
Marcus Aurelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've felt this was going to prove true all along. Just a hunch.
Tx-Ag2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Squadron7 said:

AggieAuditor said:

Nope. It lives on my amazon packages for either 3 hours or maybe 7 days.

Or two weeks.


Or a minute and a half.
Marcus Aurelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Close contact exposure with an infected individual for >20 min remains highest risk.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
On the good side, that makes infection control a lot easier. No need to UV bathe Amazon packages at the nursing home.

On the not so good side, the R0 of the virus is the same. If it's not spreading at all on surfaces, then all the spread is from close contacts. Meaning it's more contagious that way than we thought.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
cone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
plus there's the super spread problem, where 80% of infections are supposedly emanating from 10% of the infected

on a further good note, masks, moderate social distancing, and large gathering cancellations should make this pretty manageable moving forward

biggest questions being how to open up while protecting the most vulnerable and how to deal with schools
JP_Losman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If the method of transmission is up for revision then so might the Ro value.

I bet CDC revises that soon
Keller6Ag91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marcus Aurelius said:

Close contact exposure with an infected individual for >20 min remains highest risk.


When they're showing symptoms or asymptomatic?
Gig'Em and God Bless,

JB'91
Keller6Ag91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cone said:

plus there's the super spread problem, where 80% of infections are supposedly emanating from 10% of the infected

on a further good note, masks, moderate social distancing, and large gathering cancellations should make this pretty manageable moving forward

biggest questions being how to open up while protecting the most vulnerable and how to deal with schools


Seems easy enough. Vunerable folks need to self-quarantine. The rest of us need to start living normally again. If we get it, a vast majority of us will be fine.
Gig'Em and God Bless,

JB'91
Marcus Aurelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Keller6Ag91 said:

Marcus Aurelius said:

Close contact exposure with an infected individual for >20 min remains highest risk.


When they're showing symptoms or asymptomatic?
Either. It is felt the highest risk of infectivity is 48 hrs prior to onset of symptoms.
Keller6Ag91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marcus Aurelius said:

Keller6Ag91 said:

Marcus Aurelius said:

Close contact exposure with an infected individual for >20 min remains highest risk.


When they're showing symptoms or asymptomatic?
Either. It is felt the highest risk of infectivity is 48 hrs prior to onset of symptoms.
Thank you. And do we know the amount of % of the populace that was asymptomatic and presumably couldn't pass it?
Gig'Em and God Bless,

JB'91
Marcus Aurelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't know that data. Might be better ? for InfectionAg, Biochem, Ranger, Rev etc.
oldyella
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What happened to the NIH dude during a press conference that publicly said the virus can live more than 24 hours on a [non porous] surface in the right circumstances?

update in brackets
Paradise Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
cone said:

plus there's the super spread problem, where 80% of infections are supposedly emanating from 10% of the infected

on a further good note, masks, moderate social distancing, and large gathering cancellations should make this pretty manageable moving forward

biggest questions being how to open up while protecting the most vulnerable and how to deal with schools

Maybe deal with schools by opening them back up?

If all this economic and lifestyle destruction is truly based on science, why would we shut down our school system based on childhood Covid death rates that are dwarfed by a myriad of other threats to our children both medical and physical? Threats that parents have always dealt with in the course of child rearing and this thing we call life?
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The main concern isn't what will happen to the kids. The main concern is that schools are breeding grounds for infectious illness. Our hospital and clinic see a dramatic drop-off in sick visits and admissions when school lets out every summer, and we see an uptick in both within a week of school restarting in August. We have linear growth, and most places can handle the volume of new cases. The curve is flat and the disease is progressing at mostly a slow burn. However, it's possible that reopening schools would be like throwing gasoline on that slow burn, and things might get out of hand.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fortunately we have examples in Europe to see how it's going as they re-open schools. Or Sweden, that never closed primary schools.
Paradise Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

The main concern isn't what will happen to the kids. The main concern is that schools are breeding grounds for infectious illness. Our hospital and clinic see a dramatic drop-off in sick visits and admissions when school lets out every summer, and we see an uptick in both within a week of school restarting in August. We have linear growth, and most places can handle the volume of new cases. The curve is flat and the disease is progressing at mostly a slow burn. However, it's possible that reopening schools would be like throwing gasoline on that slow burn, and things might get out of hand.

So keep schools shut down because maybe?

How do children ever develop herd immunity? Is the "go date" when there's a vaccine? What if that's years? A decade?

There's European countries with their children back to school. Have they thrown gasoline on a fire too or have they made a data-based risk assessment?

We now know that kids are the least effected demographic yet we're still working hard to find reasons not to at least return their lives back to something resembling normalcy. If we can't open it up for the children, who can we open it up for?

ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Did I say we shouldn't reopen schools or set some far off, unachievable goal to do so? Any reasonable person should think twice before reopening schools for the reasons I said. Doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't do it. It's also a "cat out of the bag" situation. If you fully open schools and it turns out to be a bad idea, it's really too late. That cat doesn't go back in the bag. So it's prudent to consider phased reopening and to watch what other countries and states do and see what the impact would be. And by August we'll have tons of information we don't have now, so no need to make major decisions now when there is no hurry and more information incoming.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Observer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Data suggests that school-age and young adults are at very low risk of developing serious conditions from COVID-19. Certainly when schools are open back up, the number of COVID-19 within this segment of the population will increase. However, does it matter even significant increase of COVID-19 within this segment as they are fairly "immune"?

For elderly segment, a new strategy must be develped, including signficantly more screenings/testings/isolations. Why waste resources to test people under 45 while clearly the vulnerable segment of the population is 65+?
KidDoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I agreed with closing schools at the beginning but as the collective fund of knowledge has grown this is harmless for the overwhelming majority of children. This is very odd for respiratory viruses but seems to be holding true.

Schools need to reopen now that widespread testing is available. Spacing would be nice but hopeless in kids younger than 10 or so. When a child gets sick they need to not be sent to school and tested. There still will be an uptick in cases but I think the hospital and clinics are ready (at least in Texas).

Once/if a vaccine is out I think kids will be the last to get it, if ever. I would not be surprised to see the initial FDA approval for 18+ or even 40+ unless they have a condition that increases risk.

Heck I just had a report from a 2 year old Hemophilia patient with a bacterial line infection and COVID at the same time. No respiratory symptoms at all.



No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tysker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
ramblin_ag02 said:

The main concern isn't what will happen to the kids. The main concern is that schools are breeding grounds for infectious illness. Our hospital and clinic see a dramatic drop-off in sick visits and admissions when school lets out every summer, and we see an uptick in both within a week of school restarting in August. We have linear growth, and most places can handle the volume of new cases. The curve is flat and the disease is progressing at mostly a slow burn. However, it's possible that reopening schools would be like throwing gasoline on that slow burn, and things might get out of hand.
Serious question: is the drop off in sick visits due to actual illness or that kids are willing to 'suck it up' so to speak during the summer months while their willing to miss school? Or maybe the flu and cold happen to coincide with the school year?

And kids that may be reading, remember Ferris' guidance:
A lot of people will tell you that a good phony fever is a dead lock, but, you get a nervous mother, you could wind up in a doctor's office. That's worse than school.
SkiMo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's like everyone skips past the fact that there are teachers at school who aren't children.
jenn96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teachers can distance from each other a lot more easily than kids can. It will probably mean adjustments like no common break rooms, things like that but generally, kids don't seem to be passing this disease around. very curious to see that data as schools around the world open back up, but it is logical with the data we have now to open schools and have the adults in those schools spend less time together to prevent and slow any spread.
SkiMo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jenn96 said:

Teachers can distance from each other a lot more easily than kids can. It will probably mean adjustments like no common break rooms, things like that but generally, kids don't seem to be passing this disease around. very curious to see that data as schools around the world open back up, but it is logical with the data we have now to open schools and have the adults in those schools spend less time together to prevent and slow any spread.
I don't think there is enough reliable data to make a blanket statement like "kids don't spread it". Why does a decision have to be made right now about schools just to make everyone feel better? Lots of older teachers in schools. I would love if kids can't pass it around. But I think we need more proof of that.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
To be a stickler, there is a difference between "doesn't spread as easily as previously thought" and what I believe has actually happened, which is "we previously didn't know but now we know more."
NASAg03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SkiMo said:

It's like everyone skips past the fact that there are teachers at school who aren't children.
How many 60+ year old teachers do you know? The few at-risk teachers can teach proxy through a younger teacher's aid, and via a video screen with the students in the room.

Same with college professors. They rarely teach directly anyway. It's usually TA's doing the work and directly interacting with students.

This is a problem that doesn't really exist, but people make it out to be way worse than it is. And the small issues are easily solved with a little bit of creativity, technology, and understanding how kids learn and what really goes on in school.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Same with college professors. They rarely teach directly anyway. It's usually TA's doing the work and directly interacting with students.
You must've had a very different set of college professors than I did.
Tx-Ag2010
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TXAggie2011 said:

Quote:

Same with college professors. They rarely teach directly anyway. It's usually TA's doing the work and directly interacting with students.
You must've had a very different set of college professors than I did.


Only time I saw the TA was for tutoring and Lab.
jenn96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SkiMo said:

jenn96 said:

Teachers can distance from each other a lot more easily than kids can. It will probably mean adjustments like no common break rooms, things like that but generally, kids don't seem to be passing this disease around. very curious to see that data as schools around the world open back up, but it is logical with the data we have now to open schools and have the adults in those schools spend less time together to prevent and slow any spread.
I don't think there is enough reliable data to make a blanket statement like "kids don't spread it". Why does a decision have to be made right now about schools just to make everyone feel better? Lots of older teachers in schools. I would love if kids can't pass it around. But I think we need more proof of that.
I agree; there's not enough data yet. My comment was based on this article from Iceland, which is one of the most studied populations with extensive genetic tracking of the disease.
https://www.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/blog/hunting-down-covid-19/

Quote:

The clinical diversity of COVID-19 is another big question. Some people describe it as a mild cold. Others end up on a respirator and die.

Men are much more likely to become infected than women. If women get infected, they do not get as sick as men.

Children under 10 are less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.
I added the bold but that line really got my attention. Granted it's just one study, but if it can be replicated it makes a huge difference because the idea of kids as transmission vectors for the adults in school can be managed, and the adults just have to be more careful with each other. Which they can do, they're adults. Add in the fact that women are less likely to get infected in the first place. What percentage of school teachers and administrators are women? 85%? It makes me feel a lot better about our ability to manage school openings and control outbreaks.
TXAggie2011
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Can someone clarify for me if they're defining "children" in that sentence as someone 9 years of age or younger?

Also, I have seen some conflicting evidence/study coming out, such as:



The source paper: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/05/04/science.abb8001
SkiMo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jenn96 said:

SkiMo said:

jenn96 said:

Teachers can distance from each other a lot more easily than kids can. It will probably mean adjustments like no common break rooms, things like that but generally, kids don't seem to be passing this disease around. very curious to see that data as schools around the world open back up, but it is logical with the data we have now to open schools and have the adults in those schools spend less time together to prevent and slow any spread.
I don't think there is enough reliable data to make a blanket statement like "kids don't spread it". Why does a decision have to be made right now about schools just to make everyone feel better? Lots of older teachers in schools. I would love if kids can't pass it around. But I think we need more proof of that.
I agree; there's not enough data yet. My comment was based on this article from Iceland, which is one of the most studied populations with extensive genetic tracking of the disease.
https://www.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/blog/hunting-down-covid-19/

Quote:

The clinical diversity of COVID-19 is another big question. Some people describe it as a mild cold. Others end up on a respirator and die.

Men are much more likely to become infected than women. If women get infected, they do not get as sick as men.

Children under 10 are less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.
I added the bold but that line really got my attention. Granted it's just one study, but if it can be replicated it makes a huge difference because the idea of kids as transmission vectors for the adults in school can be managed, and the adults just have to be more careful with each other. Which they can do, they're adults. Add in the fact that women are less likely to get infected in the first place. What percentage of school teachers and administrators are women? 85%? It makes me feel a lot better about our ability to manage school openings and control outbreaks.
I understand. And agree if there are more studies out there that prove this is the case. I've read this article previously and was encouraged. But there needs to be more studies. And I don't think women are getting this disease less than men due to genetics. I think it's because (without being sexist) more men have continued to work in essential type roles such as construction, manufacturing, meat factories, etc. that open them up to more exposure. And many Latinos fall into this category which is why you see a higher % of cases among them vs. their % of the population.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.