I believe late December was always considered a possible date of infection here. The issue was been with people suggesting it was here in November or early December. That is impossible.

Quote:

---

Finally, and this is being ticky tack but given this was a bit of cheap shot of a bump I feel compelled to include it, the OP asked about community spread in California in December of which none of the updates posts give any evidence for at all even if we take everything the articles say at face value.

---

The doctor is correct with this comment!

Yes. Absolutely.

Quote:

---

The CFR is lower (probably around 0.2-0.4%) but not because there was community spread months before we know there was.

---

Is there a recognized CFR for the Flu (I know it is a generalization)?

Joe Exotic said:

---

I believe late December was always considered a possible date of infection here. The issue was been with people suggesting it was here in November or early December. That is impossible.

---

Totally agree on that.

It's not unreasonable to think Wuhan travelers brought it back around Christmas, however.

MaroonDontRun said:

---

Quote:

---

The CFR is lower (probably around 0.2-0.4%) but not because there was community spread months before we know there was.

---

Is there a recognized CFR for the Flu (I know it is a generalization)?

---

It varies from year to year. Pandemic flu outbreaks tend to have CFR ranging from 0.2 to 3% (though H1N1 was lower). The CFR 10 year average for confirmed flu is around 0.1%, meaning the actual CFR is likely around 0.01%. The CFR for this based on confirmed cases will likely be around 1-1.2%, with the actual CFR closer to 0.2% or so.

That's a complicated way of saying it's far more deadly than run of the mill influenza A but on par with to much less deadly than the worst flu pandemics.

I have serious doubts about China's claim the outbreak started around early December

https://www.ibtimes.sg/coronavirus-did-wuhan-lab-shutdown-october-cellphone-data-fuels-conspiracy-44690

Aren't all news stories bad? Why believe this one? Gonna trust the media with this one but not others?

Interesting.

Ranger222 said:

---

---

And this is precisely why "common sense" arguments are rarely applicable in the realm of science and medicine. This is decidedly counter-intuitive to most people.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

MuckRaker96 said:

---

Dont argue with doctors, they are never wrong!

---

Doctors are wrong all the time, but genetics aren't.

---

This...is the stupidest thing I've read all day.

Didnt Trevor Bedford also say this very clearly in his Twitter feed?

And then I read articles like this, where the following statements are made.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/05/851091042/french-doctors-find-covid-case-from-december-a-month-before-1st-known-case-there

Quote:

---

"It tells us that the virus existed in France in December," Cohen says. "This is important because to fight a virus, you need to know its life cycle. So this case will allow us to better understand the evolution of the virus on French soil."

Cohen says researchers will now study the genetic code of the virus that infected Hammar, to see if it can be linked to other samples analyzed in China. If a link is found to a different kind of coronavirus than was previously identified in France, it would have important implications, he said: "It would point to different contamination sources worldwide."

If the positive case is accurate, this would not be the first time that the coronavirus timeline has been rewritten.

---

maybe I am reading that wrong but it seems to me that new datapoints start the whole dating process over again. If that is the case (maybe I am wrong here), how can definitive statements be made at the moment?

And I dont make the above statement believing at all that somehow this thing has been running wild since October and half society has already had the bug . . . . I am just pushing back on the concept that some genetic calculation has been made and therefore we know everything there is to know. In this case, it seems no different than any modeling exercise in that the data-set is probably incomplete and therefore we . . .to Dr. Bedford's very point, have to be careful interpreting results.

Jack Boyett said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

No

---

Since when has this guy been even a little wrong?

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3101820/replies/56228294

Not only was Covid in California in Dec, but genetics DID change and are now wrong. Damn what a world we are living in. I dont think I can go on.